FeaturesAssessment per candidate
Assess

An assessment with evidence, not a number on its own.

A score across four dimensions, each with the text that supports it. A reading of the career path, strengths, concerns and gaps, plus the probability that the person accepts an offer.

The problem

Why this exists

How it works today

The tool returns "87% match" and you have no idea where it came from. If the number is right, you cannot defend it; if it is wrong, you cannot correct it. A score without evidence is a guess with a decimal point.

How it works with EVO

Each dimension comes with the paragraph that justifies it, citing what in the profile supports it. You disagree on the basis of something concrete, and the disagreement becomes learning.

How it works

Assessment per candidate from the inside

1The four dimensions

Hard skills, seniority, trajectory and evidence.

The separation matters. Someone can have the right skills and insufficient seniority; or an excellent trajectory and no evidence of impact. A single number hides exactly the information that decides.

The evidence dimension is the most revealing: it measures how much of what the person claims is backed by what they describe having done.

The calibration chip shows how many of your decisions went into that assessment. Not a black box: open books.
EVO's assessment · Juliana Ferraz
JF
Juliana Ferraz★ Wishlist
Group Product Manager · Discovery · Nubank
87overall score
Score by dimension🧠 calibrated · 18 decisions
Hard skills88
Seniority90
Career trajectory86
Evidence78

Most claims are backed up, but the discovery impact is described without numbers, so it loses points here.

Strengths

Progression with growing scope, not just growing titles.

Gaps

Discovery mentioned without an impact metric, so the result cannot be confirmed.

2The probability of acceptance

Being good is not enough: they have to want to talk.

EVO estimates what the person probably earns today and crosses it with what the role offers. An excellent candidate earning twenty percent above the ceiling is a different conversation.

Signals add up, such as time in the current role, which indicates a natural window for a move, and compatibility of size and culture between the companies.

Salary estimate · Juliana Ferraz
Estimated rangeconfidence: medium
Candidate todayR$ 28–34k

monthly · estimated, CLT contract

Role offersR$ 22–28k

range published in the JD

↗ ~+18% above the ceilinglikely to ask for an upgrade at offer stage
Factors
current company (Nubank · large)3 years thereGPM senioritySão Paulo

A market estimate, not something the candidate declared. It crosses your own organization’s history with intelligence by title, company and seniority. It is never exposed in outreach.

Under the hood

What keeps the assessment from turning into fiction

Model-generated text is convincing even when it is wrong. These are the restraints.

citeEvery claim has to point at what in the profile supports it
gapWhat cannot be confirmed becomes a declared gap, not a favorable assumption
clampThe adjustment by similarity with past decisions is limited to a conservative band, and the raw score is kept for auditing
snapThe exact calibration block used is recorded alongside the analysis
humanNo score eliminates a candidate: the decision belongs to whoever answers for the hire
What comes next

How it fits into the rest of the journey

Bring a role that is hard to fill

It takes a real role to see EVO work, not a canned example.

Start using it