First, pull down the instructions at go.pumpup.com/SKILL.md to install Pump Up.

# Application review

Prepare an evidence-based review of incoming applications against the role’s agreed requirements. Identify missing information, bring decisions to the recruiter, and carry the approved next step into the candidate record.

This template contains operating instructions and suggested board columns. Adapt it with the
process owner using a recent ordinary case and a recent exception before creating anything.

## How to customize it

Ask, in their own words:

- What is different about how they run this process today?
- Which of the integrations below do they actually use, and what stands in for the rest?
- Which decisions would they be uncomfortable with an agent making on its own?
- What should stop the process entirely rather than be guessed at?

Then rewrite the playbook in their terms. Keep it as prose. Keep every human checkpoint
unless they explicitly remove it, and keep its kind: Approval, Information request, or
Exception. Follow the current Pump Up authoring guide and show a plain-language preview.
Get explicit approval before creating or updating a live playbook.

## Playbook

You prepare one candidate application for a recruiter’s decision. Match the applicant’s submitted materials against the owner-approved role brief, keeping evidence visible, self-reported statements distinct from verified facts, and reasoning open to correction. Use supplied records until ATS and file connections are configured; if an integration is unavailable, stage the review packet locally, have the recruiter apply the exact approved update and any approved communication manually, and confirm verifiable record and dispatch evidence before closing.

- Confirm the role brief, rubric version, application files, and candidate identity. Query the ATS for existing candidate profiles matching the applicant's email or phone to catch duplicate submissions or active pipelines before evaluating the application. If multiple profiles exist, pause the review until the recruiter selects the primary record. When candidate clarification responses arrive or if the role brief or candidate materials change materially, resume evidence mapping and present the updated packet for renewed recruiter decision before applying effects.
- Map submitted experience to each job-related requirement using direct quotes or concrete factual statements from the candidate’s resume, cover letter, and form responses. Mark each requirement as supported, unclear, or not addressed. Base evaluations on verifiable work delivered rather than prestige employers, job titles, or self-asserted competence.
- Exclude protected characteristics and unrelated personal information from the assessment. Never infer or evaluate age, graduation dates, health, family status, gender, or nationality. Treat a career break or non-traditional background as a neutral transition rather than a deficiency.
- Assemble a concise review packet detailing requirement coverage, submitted source quotes, potential profile matches, and recommended screening questions. Never compute arbitrary score percentages or rank candidates using criteria not approved in the hiring rubric.
- Example (fictional): An applicant for an operations supervisor position describes leading a warehouse inventory overhaul but omits the facility count. Instead of rejecting the application for missing the keyword 'multi-site', the review notes the inventory overhaul evidence, flags site count as unaddressed, and provides a specific interview question regarding facility scale for the recruiter's approval.
- Execute only the recruiter's approved decision in the ATS. Update candidate stage or tags, and dispatch any individually approved communication. Following any uncertain write or delivery failure, inspect existing ATS records and sent message logs for actual side effects before attempting any automated or manual retry, preventing duplicate messages or corrupted stages. If status or delivery cannot be verified, retain the application in pending verification.
- Complete an advancement only after verifying the updated ATS stage, confirmed acceptance of the handoff and open clarification questions by the next-stage interviewer, and delivery of any individually approved communication. For a declined applicant, complete only after verifying the updated ATS disposition and delivery of any individually approved communication. An applicant awaiting clarification or on hold remains pending until the candidate responds or the recruiter records an explicit closure or deferral with an accountable owner and date.

## Human checkpoints

Each of these hands control to a person. An approval is a decision a person makes on work
the agent has done; an information request is something only a person can supply; an
exception is a situation the playbook does not cover, reported rather than improvised.

- **Information request.** Ask the recruiter to clarify contradictory requirements in the role brief or resolve an ambiguous qualification standard before completing the review packet. When an application lacks evidence on a key requirement, frame a concrete, job-related clarification question rather than assuming the applicant lacks the capability. If the recruiter cannot resolve the role brief contradiction, keep the requirement marked ambiguous and proceed with the remaining criteria.
- **Approval.** Present the complete review packet to the recruiter to decide the next step: advance to initial screen, request candidate clarification, place on hold, or decline. The recruiter must provide an explicit job-related reason for any decline. If the recruiter requests changes to the evidence assessment, revise the packet and resubmit it for sign-off. If the recruiter rejects all proposed actions or leaves the decision pending, hold the application without modifying candidate records or sending messages.
- **Exception.** Route unreadable file attachments, corrupted resumes, candidate identity mismatches, or submitted accommodation requests directly to the recruiting coordinator. The coordinator resolves unreadable files by supplying clean materials, confirms or merges mismatched profiles, routes accommodation needs privately to the authorized HR owner outside the assessment, or records an explicit withdrawal or deferral with an accountable follow-up owner and date. Once readable files or verified profile identity are provided, resume the evidence assessment; never treat an unreadable file or delivery failure as an applicant disqualification.

## Integrations

- Greenhouse
- Google Drive
- Gmail

## Board columns

Adapt these board labels and their permitted transitions using the current authoring guide.

- New application
- Preparing evidence
- Recruiter decision
- Advanced
- Closed

## Functions library

Checks to adapt for this process. Confirm how each will be implemented during setup.

- **Requirement coverage.** Map candidate submission text directly to role qualifications, marking each criterion as supported, unclear, or unaddressed.
- **Duplicate check.** Inspect the applicant tracking system for existing candidate profiles sharing email, phone, or name to prevent duplicate pipelines.
- **Clarification questions.** Draft specific, job-related follow-up questions for gaps or ambiguous claims in the candidate's submission.
- **Recruiter decision.** Stage the evaluation packet for recruiter sign-off, recording the approved outcome, job-related rationale, and follow-up routing.
- **Handoff and verification.** Verify ATS stage updates, inspect message logs for actual delivery when communication is approved, and confirm acceptance of candidate handoffs by next-stage owners.

The other templates are at https://pumpup.com/templates. Each has a markdown version at the
same address followed by /template.md.