This started as three threads that turned out to be the same problem.
Three unrelated threads
Building analytics agents for a TikTok client taught me SEO for reach: what actually makes something findable instead of buried. Building my own portfolio and commongrnd.ai taught me the other half: branding, logo recognition, the right words in the right place. Maintaining my own LinkedIn on top of both surfaced a narrower version of the same problem. It's person-facing in a way a website isn't, and getting the photo, the headline, and the keywords right by hand, every time something changed, was tedious enough that I started dreading touching it. My resume drifted right along with it.
The other side of the job search
Then this year I went through my first real job search since graduating three years ago. Recruiter outreach, screens, interviews, enough of them to start recognizing the pattern underneath what companies were actually screening for.
On the other side of that same process, I'd been helping a few people directly with their own resumes and job searches. Different people, different careers, but the same handful of things needed fixing every time: a bullet with no real outcome attached, a title that didn't quite match what they'd actually done, a LinkedIn that said something different than the resume did. It wasn't a problem unique to me.
Building one system instead of three
Those things pointed at the same gap. A resume, a LinkedIn profile, and a portfolio are the same underlying information, restated for different audiences, and every version I'd built by hand drifted the moment I touched one without touching the others. So instead of continuing to do it by hand, I standardized the whole process into one system: it fact-checks a resume against real source material and scores it, tailors it to a specific job and checks the actual fit, and keeps a portfolio site honest against the same facts. The rule underneath all of it is the one that matters most: never invent a number. A missing metric gets flagged, never papered over.
What broke when I handed it off
Once it worked for me, I packaged it to hand to someone else, and that process surfaced real gaps the original version didn't have. It made assumptions that only held true on my own machine. One of its own checks gave a false result on a case it hadn't seen before. Both caught and fixed before it left my hands.
Proof before the system was even finished
The clearest proof this works arrived before I'd even finished packaging it. The tailored resume this process produced is the one that got submitted for the role I'm in now, a contract position that moved my pay up roughly 70–80% from where I started. LinkedIn backs it up the same way: as of mid-September 2026, 91 profile views in the past 90 days, 59 of them recruiters, with multiple calls coming directly out of it.
What started as solving my own problem turned into something that holds up on its own, built well enough that someone else can pick it up and run it without me in the room. It's not offered as a paid service yet. Next: run it for a handful of people directly, then package it for other builders to run themselves.