---
name: candidate-rejection-comms
source: https://app.decimal.ai/s/candidate-rejection-comms@1/SKILL.md
source_sha256: f925a79b2406
---

# Candidate rejection message: warm, final, legally cautious

When you draft the message that tells a candidate they are not moving forward, follow these
conventions. Left to itself, the base model tries to be maximally *helpful*: it explains the
specific reason, compares the candidate to whoever got the role, itemizes what was weak, and softens
the blow with cheerful "please apply again soon!" encouragement. Each of those instincts creates
legal exposure or false hope. The moves below steer the message back to warm, final, and safe.

These conventions govern **what the message says and withholds** — not the channel, the template
header, or whether to reject the candidate at all (that decision is already made before you write).

## 1. Be final, not a door left ajar

The decision is made. The message closes the loop for *this* role: "we've decided not to move
forward with your application." Do not phrase the "no" as tentative, under review, or reconsiderable
("we might circle back," "still weighing options"). A soft no reads as hope and invites follow-up.
Warmth comes from courtesy and respect, not from blurring the decision.

## 2. Withhold the specific, adjudicable reason

Do **not** state the particular reason the candidate was passed over. A named reason is something a
candidate — or their lawyer — can dispute, disprove, or reframe as pretext. This is the single
biggest change from the base model's instinct.

Avoid all of these:
- **A comparative reason.** No "we found a candidate with more X," "another applicant was stronger
  in Y." Never measure the rejected candidate against the person hired.
- **An evaluative fault.** No "your system-design answers were weak," "you seemed underprepared,"
  "your take-home had bugs." Do not itemize shortcomings.
- **Internal debrief language.** Whatever the hiring panel wrote candidly ("disorganized,"
  "not sharp enough") never appears in the candidate-facing message.
- **A sensitive disqualifier.** Reference-check concerns, background findings, and salary-band
  mismatches are real reasons — and exactly the ones you do not put in writing.

Instead, keep the decision unexplained but courteous: acknowledge the effort, state the outcome, and
stop. "After careful consideration we've decided to move forward with other candidates" is a complete
reason. It does not owe an itemized justification.

## 3. Never touch a protected characteristic

Nothing in the message may reference, or let a reader infer, a legally protected trait — age, sex,
pregnancy or family status, race, national origin, accent or language, religion, disability, health.
This holds even when the trait truly influenced the decision (which is its own problem, outside this
message's job): the rejection is not the place to put it in writing.

Also avoid the coded proxies that map onto protected traits:
- **"Culture fit" / "not the right personality for our team"** — reads as a proxy for age, race, or
  disability and is legally radioactive. Cut it.
- **"Overqualified" / "you'd be bored" / "worried you'd leave"** — a common stand-in for age. Cut it.
- **"Communication style" / "accent" / "hard to understand"** — a proxy for national origin. Cut it.
- **Anything about availability, leave, or timing** when the candidate disclosed a pregnancy, illness,
  or caregiving need. Do not tie the decision to it.

## 4. No false future — offer only a truthful, non-committal openness

Do not manufacture hope. Avoid a specific false promise: "definitely apply for the [named] role next
quarter," "we'll keep your resume on file and reach out when something opens," "reapply soon" — unless
that is literally true and planned. A concrete future commitment you won't honor is both unkind and,
if a pattern emerges, evidence.

If your goodwill is genuine, keep it **general and non-committal**: "we'd genuinely welcome an
application from you if a suitable role opens in the future" is fine — it promises nothing specific.
When there is no realistic future opening, skip the future entirely and close on plain well-wishes.

## What the message *does* include

Keep it short — a few sentences:
- A sincere thank-you for the candidate's time, interest, or effort.
- The clear, final decision that they are not moving forward for this role.
- A warm, respectful tone throughout — human, not a form letter.
- A genuine well-wish to close ("we wish you the best in your search").

## Putting it together

> **Situation:** A candidate gave weaker system-design answers than the person hired; the panel's
> notes said "underprepared." We're passing.
>
> **Over-explained (avoid):** "Thank you for interviewing. Unfortunately your system-design round was
> noticeably weaker than the candidate we selected, who had more distributed-systems experience, and
> the panel felt you were underprepared. We were still impressed — please definitely apply again next
> quarter when we open more roles!"
>
> **Warm, final, cautious (aim for):** "Thank you for the time you put into interviewing with us — we
> genuinely appreciated getting to know you. After careful consideration, we've decided not to move
> forward with your application for this role. This was a competitive process and the decision was not
> an easy one. We wish you all the best in your search."

Same "no." The second version withholds every adjudicable reason, names no protected trait, and
promises no false future — while staying warm and unmistakably final. That restraint is the job.