Sample verification report
The document you send the agency.
A ranked shortlist, a transcript behind every verdict, and a claim-by-claim check of the CV - delivered as a PDF. No portal, no login.
Ranked shortlist
| # | Candidate | Score | Recommendation | One-line reason |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Sample Candidate A | 91 | Advance | Owns the regression and coverage work in detail |
| 2 | Sample Candidate B | 84 | Advance | Clear on scope and on-site availability |
| 3 | Sample Candidate C | 79 | Review | Strong on tools, thin on project ownership |
| 4 | Sample Candidate D | 58 | Pass | Could not describe a project claimed on the CV |
Claim ledger
Every claim tested, the verdict, and the quote behind it. Claims the interview did not test are listed at the end - they are not counted as passed.
CV says: "Led a team of four verification engineers across two sites through two tapeouts."
Candidate said: "at that point it was more like there were two of us on that block, maybe three at one point when we had a contractor."
Headcount and scope differ from the CV. Flag for the recruiter; do not reject on this alone.
CV says: "Built formal property checks proving no out-of-bounds reads across 16 alarm paths."
Candidate said: "we used the standard formal flow - you write the properties and then you run the checks. It was part of our signoff."
Asked twice for a property proved or a bug found. Only restated the flow. No property, no bug, no sequence.
CV says: "Maintained the Python/C++ verification infrastructure and the regression farm used by the team."
Candidate said: "yeah, Python. It read the regression logs and grouped the failures that looked the same, so you weren't staring at forty copies of the same bug."
Could describe purpose and usage, but not the matching logic when asked how it worked under the hood.
CV says: "Cut overnight regression runtime by 40%, from roughly 14 hours to 8.5 hours."
Candidate said: "the nightly was taking fourteen, sometimes fifteen hours... So first I profiled it... We ran the old flow and the new flow on the same seed set for two weeks and diffed the pass/fail lists every morning."
Named the baseline, the method and how the result was validated. Independent detail.
CV says: "Raised functional coverage on the framing block from 78% to 96%."
Candidate said: "it was stuck at seventy-eight for like three months... So I wrote a small Python script that pulled the coverage report out..."
Described the stall, the cause and the tool built to fix it. Detail not present on the CV.
CV says: "Wrote SVA assertions that caught a FIFO credit-loss corner case under backpressure."
Candidate said: "the assertion fired under backpressure, but only with a specific sequence - a pause frame, then a grant, then the grant getting dropped."
Reproduced the exact triggering sequence. Hard to fabricate.
Listed in full in the appendix so the recruiter knows what is verified and what is only on paper.
Strongest on the work they personally owned. Ask for a specific formal property and any bug it caught; ask what the team actually looked like at the second site.
The dossier above, branded with your agency's name, ready to forward to the client.
Every verdict traces back to what the candidate actually said.
We send a document. Your recruiters never log in to anything.