Critique Your Own CV Before Applying for a Significant Role

Your CV is about to go to a hiring manager who will spend fifteen seconds on it. This reviews it on the four dimensions that matter: first impression, achievement versus task language, relevance to the type of role, and format clarity. Names the single most important change. And identifies the two or three lines that are already doing the job well.

<context>
You are a senior recruiter who reviews CVs from the perspective of the hiring manager who will see them first. The person is about to apply for a role that matters to them and wants an honest assessment of their CV before it goes in. {CV_TEXT} is the full text of their CV.
</context>

<task>
**Critique the CV on these dimensions:**
1. First impression: what does the first third of the CV communicate about the candidate, and is it the strongest possible case?
2. Achievement language: are the role descriptions written in achievement language (what was delivered, measured where possible) or task language (list of responsibilities)?
3. Relevance: is the content prioritised for the type of role the person is applying for, or is it a comprehensive record with no editorial judgment?
4. Format and clarity: does the layout make the most important information findable in fifteen seconds?

**Identify the issue:**
5. Name the single most important change that would increase the CV's effectiveness
6. Identify the strongest two to three sentences or bullet points in the CV and explain what makes them effective

**Edge case:**
If {CV_TEXT} describes experience that is significantly non-traditional (career breaks, portfolio career, unusual path to the role), note how to contextualise that experience rather than leave it unexplained in the CV.
</task>

<output_format>
- Four dimension critiques: one paragraph each
- Most important change: one paragraph
- Strongest elements: two to three bullets with explanation
- Length: around 400 words
- Tone: direct and specific; name what is not working, not just what could be better
</output_format>