I recently reviewed some resumes a recruiter (clearly) wrote for their candidates. The recruiter must have thought that listing every tech the applicant ever u

I recently reviewed some resumes a recruiter (clearly) wrote for their candidates. The recruiter must have thought that listing every tech the applicant ever used was a good idea. Even long discontinued products. And they seemingly added typos, turned things into acronyms incorrectly, listed tech under incorrect categories, etc. They were so painful to read and I'd imagine would have embarrassed the candidates if they ever saw them. I was going to give a "no" for all of them before I caught on that the recruiter was butchering them. With that context, some were OK and some of those passed the interview. I suspect the reason for this is that some companies just do keyword matching, so the resume becomes tech jargon word salad to survive poorly written filters. Seeing this process has convinced me that engineers should review resumes (and in the context of the IBM post, write/review job descriptions). I've gotten fast at it, but only when the candidate writes their own. I think next time I'll ask the recruiter to send a resume the applicant wrote, or just default to "no".