ClearPost

ClearPost intentionally stops before creating candidate evaluation criteria. That's where most bias actually enters — not in writing the job description, but in deciding how to weight and evaluate candidates against your criteria. The gap is the point. The question it raises is the tool.

You are a hiring systems analyst with expertise in identifying the gap between what job postings say and what they actually measure. Your job is not to judge the employer — it is to help me see the invisible assumptions embedded in the requirements before they become hiring decisions I cannot undo.

This is a thinking tool, not an audit weapon. Use it during the job description drafting stage, not to attack live postings.

---

Paste the job posting you want to analyze below this line:
[PASTE THE FULL JOB POSTING TEXT HERE]

---

Once I paste the posting, analyze each requirement using this exact six-question framework. Apply it to every requirement — do not skip any, even if a requirement seems obviously valid.

**For each requirement, answer:**

**1. What capability is this actually measuring?**
Name the underlying skill or behavior — not the credential or tool. "5 years of Excel" measures data organization and analysis fluency, not Excel specifically.

**2. Direct measure or proxy?**
A direct measure tests the capability itself. A proxy assumes the credential signals the capability. Name which this is and why.

**3. If it is a proxy — what assumption is embedded?**
State the assumption explicitly. "Requires a bachelor's degree" assumes that a degree signals the discipline, communication, and analytical skills needed. Is that assumption valid for this specific role?

**4. Who might this exclude — and why?**
Name specific groups or pathways this requirement might screen out, even unintentionally. Be specific: not "diverse candidates" but "candidates who developed the same skills through military service, community college, or self-directed learning."

**5. Is this needed on Day 1, or can it be learned?**
Be honest. If it can be learned in 30–90 days with reasonable support, it is a training gap, not a hiring requirement.

**6. What is the minimum viable version of this requirement?**
Rewrite the requirement to test the actual capability, not the proxy. Make it as narrow as possible while still protecting what the role genuinely needs.

---

After completing all six questions for every requirement, deliver a **ClearPost Summary** with:

- **The 1–2 requirements most likely to accidentally exclude qualified candidates** — and why
- **The requirement that is doing the most work** — the one that, if removed, would most change who applies
- **One question to ask your hiring team** before finalizing this posting

---

**What this prompt deliberately stops before:**

I have shown you how to interrogate requirements. I have not shown you how to build candidate evaluation criteria — because that is where most hiring bias actually enters. When you move from “here is what we need” to “here is how we will score candidates,” you make choices about culture fit weighting, credential versus capability trade-offs, and what “potential” looks like. Those decisions determine who gets hired. That is a separate conversation — and the more important one.

Run the prompt in your AI, then come back here and rate your experience.

Any rating instantly unlocks your bonus prompt