How to use Claude to land your next job: the 3-part system that cuts a new key for every lock

You are a career evidence interviewer. Your job is to extract every piece of usable proof from my working history and put it in one master file. You are not writing my CV yet.

Hard rules:
- You may never invent, inflate or assume an achievement. If I say something vague, ask a follow-up until it's specific or mark it "unverified" and move on.
- Push back on modesty. If I describe something as "just part of my job", ask what would have happened if nobody had done it.
- Numbers over adjectives. Every time I use a word like "improved", ask "by how much, over what period, compared to what".

Work through my roles one at a time, most recent first. For each role, ask me these in sequence and wait for each answer:
1. What was actually broken or missing when you arrived?
2. What did you personally do about it? Not the team. You.
3. What changed as a result, and how would someone else have noticed?
4. What number can you attach to it, even a rough one? Time, money, headcount, volume, error rate, retention, speed.
5. Who thanked you, promoted you, or asked you to do it again?
6. What did you do that wasn't in your job description?

When we finish a role, ask "anything else from that period, including things that failed and taught you something?" before moving on.

Once we've covered every role, produce my EVIDENCE VAULT as a markdown file with:
- 15 to 25 achievement statements, each written as: situation, my specific action, measurable result
- A skills inventory split into three columns: proven with evidence, claimed but unproven, and gaps I should be honest about
- My 5 strongest stories, tagged with the interview questions they answer
- A "quiet strengths" section: patterns you noticed across my roles that I didn't name myself

Australian English. Be direct with me. If my evidence is thin in a particular area, say so plainly rather than dressing it up.

Here's a job ad I'm considering [paste the full ad].

Decode it for me. Don't summarise it back, analyse it.

1. THE REAL JOB. In 3 sentences, what will this person actually spend their week doing? Job ads describe the ideal. Tell me the reality behind the wording.
2. WHY THIS ROLE EXISTS NOW. Is this a growth hire, a backfill, a rescue mission, or a role nobody has scoped properly? Point at the specific phrases that gave it away.
3. THE SCREENING CRITERIA. Split the requirements into three lists: genuine dealbreakers, negotiable preferences, and copy-paste filler that means nothing.
4. THE UNWRITTEN ASK. What are they anxious about? What went wrong last time that this ad is quietly trying to prevent?
5. LANGUAGE MAP. List the exact terms and phrases this employer uses for things I might call something else, so I can mirror their vocabulary rather than mine.
6. RED FLAGS. Anything in here that suggests understaffing, unclear ownership, unrealistic scope or a rebadged junior role at a senior title.

Finish with one question I should ask them at interview that shows I read past the buzzwords.

Australian English. Be direct. If the ad is vague, say so and tell me what to ask before I apply.

Using my EVIDENCE VAULT and the decoded ad above, build my application for this specific role.

Absolute constraint: every claim must trace back to something in my vault. You may reframe, reorder and re-word my evidence. You may not add experience I don't have. If the role needs something I can't evidence, tell me it's a gap instead of papering over it.

Give me:

1. A tailored CV. Reorder my achievements so the top 3 bullet points under my most recent role map directly to their dealbreakers. Mirror their language from the language map. Cut anything that doesn't earn its place for THIS role, and tell me what you cut and why.

2. A 150-word cover note. No "I am writing to apply for". Open with the specific problem I can see they have, then the evidence that I've solved it before, then one line on why this company and not just any company. If I haven't given you a real reason for this company, ask me for one rather than writing a generic compliment.

3. A gap statement. Where I'm genuinely short, draft 2 honest sentences I could use if it comes up, that acknowledge the gap and point at the nearest adjacent evidence. Don't spin it.

4. A fit verdict. On a scale of stretch, strong or reach, how well do I actually match? If it's a reach, say so and tell me the one thing that would make it credible.

Australian English. Be direct. If my case for this role is weak, tell me where and why.

Using my evidence vault and this job ad, run a 30-minute mock interview. Ask one question at a time and wait for my answer. Include at least 3 questions designed to test the weakest part of my application. After each answer, rate it out of 10 for specificity and tell me what a stronger version would have included. At the end, give me the 2 questions I'm least prepared for and the evidence I should be using for each.

Australian English. Be direct. Don't soft-pedal the feedback.

Based on the decoded ad, my evidence vault, and the market in [your city], give me a realistic salary range for this role and explain what puts someone at the bottom versus the top of it. Then help me build my number: what I'd accept, what I'd like, and what I'd walk away from, with the specific evidence I'd use to justify the top of my range. Ask me what I currently earn only if it's relevant to the reasoning, and tell me why it is.

Australian English. Be direct. If I don't have enough evidence to justify the top of the range, say so.

Here are 5 roles I'm considering [paste them]. Using my evidence vault, rank them by three things: how strong my actual case is, how much of a step up each one represents, and how much of my week I'd enjoy. Then tell me which 2 to spend real effort on this week and which 3 to skip, with your reasoning. I make the final call, so give me the trade-offs rather than a recommendation.

Australian English. Be direct. If one of the roles is clearly a reach, say so and explain why.