Before sending a candidate submittal, check identity, role relevance, evidence, practical details, audience suitability, and the next action. Review the exact final document and destination, because a correct source note does not guarantee a correct submission.
Use a final-send checklist
| Check | Pass condition |
|---|---|
| Identity | Candidate, client, and role references match |
| Evidence | Responsibility claims trace to reviewed sources |
| Practical details | Compensation, availability, and arrangement retain conditions |
| Gaps | Material unknowns are visible |
| Audience | Internal-only content removed appropriately |
| Delivery | Correct document version and authorized destination |
This is an editorial quality checklist. It is not a compliance certification or a guarantee that a submission contains no errors.
Review the most consequential sentence
Identify the statement that most strongly supports the candidate's fit. Check it against the underlying evidence. If it says “owned implementation delivery,” confirm that the candidate described that responsibility rather than participation in the team.
Fictional example: a draft says “available to start immediately,” while the screen only established interview availability. Correct the sentence and confirm the actual timing before treating the start date as settled.
Check consistency across sections
A summary may say one thing while the practical-details table says another. Search the document for repeated figures and dates. If a correction was made, ensure every affected section reflects it.
Also compare the write-up with the current role brief. If the client changed the essential criteria after the screen, identify what needs to be revisited. Do not mark the candidate a match against a superseded brief.
Define ownership of the final review
Assign a named role in the agency's process to approve the external version. A second reviewer can be useful for unfamiliar workflows or significant revisions, but the important point is that responsibility is explicit.
Record whether the document is drafted, reviewed, sent, or corrected. Avoid using “complete” for all four states. If a send result is uncertain, reconcile it before repeating the submission.
The candidate submittal template provides the body structure; correction handling covers later changes. Recruit Recap's workflow keeps recruiter review central. A polished AI write-up should enter this check, not be treated as evidence that the check already happened.