The good resume (and I read the comment re: &quot;good resume = qualifications and not just a nice document&quot;) is where your argument falls a bit short. Make the recruiter&#x2F;HR&#x2F;hirer&#x27;s job easy for them. Assume they are unintelligent, and don&#x27;t give them an opportunity to misinterpret your background.<p>The resume is a single piece of the process. For me to open a resume, first I have to open an email. How long does it take to write a couple sentences to make me want to open your attachment&#x2F;link?<p>Then on the resume itself: write a summary. Don&#x27;t make a recruiter (who 6 months ago was a &quot;struggling unemployed kid who took the first job offered&quot;) try to interpret that you are an experienced $LANGUAGE developer with <i>n</i> years of this and that. Come out and tell them exactly what they want&#x2F;need to know in order to make the decision.<p>We generally have underqualified people reviewing resumes for companies (agency recruiters, HR, admins at startups). Don&#x27;t give them an opportunity to mess up. The job says they want a &quot;Python dev with &gt;5 years and some experience with Django&quot;? Tell them exactly that in a sentence in the email, and again as a summary statement on top of the resume.<p>This isn&#x27;t 10x effort. It&#x27;s minimal. It&#x27;s the hiring company&#x27;s fault whenever someone qualified doesn&#x27;t make it into the interview. My philosophy to my resume clients is &quot;don&#x27;t let HR screw you over - hit them over the head with your qualifications and they can&#x27;t say no&quot;.