Screen job applications against requirements and score candidates
Scanned 9/7/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add modbender/skill-library-mcp --skill applicant-screening --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Applicant Screening?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/modbender-applicant-screening)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: Applicant Screening
description: Screen job applications against requirements and score candidates
author: claude-office-skills
version: "1.0"
tags: [hr, recruitment, hiring, screening, resume]
models: [claude-sonnet-4, claude-opus-4]
tools: [computer, file_operations]
---
# Applicant Screening
Screen job applications against role requirements to identify top candidates efficiently.
## Overview
This skill helps you:
- Evaluate resumes against job requirements
- Score candidates consistently
- Identify must-have vs. nice-to-have qualifications
- Flag potential concerns
- Rank applicants for interviews
## How to Use
### Single Candidate
```
"Screen this resume against our [Job Title] requirements"
"Evaluate this application for the [Position] role"
```
### Batch Screening
```
"Screen these 10 applications for the Senior Developer position"
"Rank these candidates based on our requirements"
```
### With Criteria
```
"Screen for: 5+ years Python, AWS experience required, ML nice-to-have"
```
## Screening Framework
### Requirements Matrix
```markdown
## Job Requirements: [Position]
### Must-Have (Required)
| Requirement | Weight | Criteria |
|-------------|--------|----------|
| [Skill 1] | 20% | [X] years experience |
| [Skill 2] | 15% | [Certification/level] |
| [Education] | 10% | [Degree type] |
| [Experience] | 25% | [Industry/role type] |
### Nice-to-Have (Preferred)
| Requirement | Bonus | Criteria |
|-------------|-------|----------|
| [Skill 3] | +5pts | [Description] |
| [Skill 4] | +5pts | [Description] |
| [Trait] | +3pts | [Indicator] |
### Disqualifiers
- [ ] No work authorization
- [ ] Below minimum experience
- [ ] Missing required certification
- [ ] Salary expectation mismatch
```
## Output Formats
### Individual Screening Report
```markdown
# Candidate Screening: [Name]
## Quick Summary
| Attribute | Value |
|-----------|-------|
| **Position** | [Job Title] |
| **Score** | [X]/100 |
| **Recommendation** | 🟢 Interview / 🟡 Maybe / 🔴 Pass |
## Candidate Profile
- **Name**: [Full Name]
- **Location**: [City, State]
- **Current Role**: [Title] at [Company]
- **Total Experience**: [X] years
- **Education**: [Degree, School]
## Requirements Match
### Must-Have Requirements
| Requirement | Met? | Evidence | Score |
|-------------|------|----------|-------|
| [5+ years Python] | ✅ | 7 years at 2 companies | 20/20 |
| [AWS experience] | ✅ | AWS Certified, 3 years | 15/15 |
| [Bachelor's CS] | ✅ | BS Computer Science, MIT | 10/10 |
| [Team lead exp] | ⚠️ | Led 2-person team | 5/10 |
**Must-Have Score**: [X]/[Total]
### Nice-to-Have
| Requirement | Met? | Evidence | Bonus |
|-------------|------|----------|-------|
| [ML experience] | ✅ | Built recommendation system | +5 |
| [Startup exp] | ✅ | 2 early-stage startups | +5 |
| [Open source] | ❌ | Not mentioned | 0 |
**Nice-to-Have Bonus**: +[X] points
## Strengths 💪
1. [Strength 1 with evidence]
2. [Strength 2 with evidence]
3. [Strength 3 with evidence]
## Concerns ⚠️
1. [Concern 1 - question to ask in interview]
2. [Concern 2 - what to verify]
## Red Flags 🚩
- [If any - employment gaps, inconsistencies, etc.]
## Interview Questions
Based on this candidate's profile, consider asking:
1. [Question about specific experience]
2. [Question about concern area]
3. [Question about growth potential]
## Overall Assessment
[2-3 sentence summary of fit]
**Final Score**: [X]/100
**Recommendation**: [Interview / Phone Screen / Pass]
**Priority**: [High / Medium / Low]
```
### Batch Ranking Report
```markdown
# Applicant Ranking: [Position]
**Date**: [Date]
**Total Applications**: [X]
**Reviewed**: [X]
## Summary
| Category | Count | % |
|----------|-------|---|
| 🟢 Strong Interview | [X] | [%] |
| 🟡 Phone Screen | [X] | [%] |
| 🔵 Maybe/Hold | [X] | [%] |
| 🔴 Not a Fit | [X] | [%] |
## Top Candidates
### 🥇 Tier 1: Strong Interview (Score 80+)
| Rank | Name | Score | Key Strengths | Concerns |
|------|------|-------|---------------|----------|
| 1 | [Name] | 92 | [Strengths] | [Concerns] |
| 2 | [Name] | 88 | [Strengths] | [Concerns] |
| 3 | [Name] | 85 | [Strengths] | [Concerns] |
### 🥈 Tier 2: Phone Screen (Score 65-79)
| Rank | Name | Score | Key Strengths | Gap to Address |
|------|------|-------|---------------|----------------|
| 4 | [Name] | 75 | [Strengths] | [Gap] |
| 5 | [Name] | 72 | [Strengths] | [Gap] |
### 🥉 Tier 3: Maybe/Hold (Score 50-64)
| Name | Score | Reason for Hold |
|------|-------|-----------------|
| [Name] | 58 | [Reason] |
### ❌ Not Proceeding (Score <50)
| Name | Score | Primary Reason |
|------|-------|----------------|
| [Name] | 45 | Missing required [X] |
| [Name] | 38 | Below minimum experience |
## Insights
### Applicant Pool Quality
[Assessment of overall pool quality]
### Common Strengths
- [Frequently seen strength]
- [Frequently seen strength]
### Common Gaps
- [What most candidates lack]
- [Skill shortage in pool]
### Recommendations
1. [Action for top candidates]
2. [Suggestion for sourcing if pool weak]
```
## Scoring Rubric
### Experience Scoring
| Years | Entry | Mid | Senior | Lead |
|-------|-------|-----|--------|------|
| 0-1 | 10/10 | 3/10 | 0/10 | 0/10 |
| 2-3 | 8/10 | 7/10 | 3/10 | 0/10 |
| 4-5 | 5/10 | 10/10 | 7/10 | 3/10 |
| 6-8 | 3/10 | 8/10 | 10/10 | 7/10 |
| 9+ | 0/10 | 5/10 | 10/10 | 10/10 |
### Education Scoring
| Level | Technical Role | Non-Technical |
|-------|----------------|---------------|
| PhD | 10/10 | 8/10 |
| Master's | 9/10 | 9/10 |
| Bachelor's | 8/10 | 10/10 |
| Associate's | 5/10 | 7/10 |
| Bootcamp | 6/10 | N/A |
| Self-taught | 4/10 | N/A |
## Best Practices
### Fair Screening
- Focus on job-related criteria only
- Ignore protected characteristics
- Use consistent scoring
- Document decisions
- Consider diverse backgrounds
### Bias Awareness
- Name/gender bias: Focus on qualifications
- Affinity bias: Diverse interview panels
- Confirmation bias: Score before gut feeling
- Halo effect: Evaluate each criterion separately
### Legal Considerations
- Only use job-relevant criteria
- Apply standards consistently
- Keep screening records
- Have HR review process
- Consider adverse impact
## Limitations
- Cannot verify employment history
- May miss context from non-traditional backgrounds
- Scoring is guidance, not absolute
- Cannot assess cultural fit or soft skills fully
- Human judgment essential for final decisions
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!