Job descriptions built from the requisition you already filled in

Most job description generators are a prompt box. You type senior backend engineer, fintech, London, and receive four hundred words of confident, generic text that mentions a fast-paced environment and a rockstar team. It reads fine and it describes nothing, because nothing specific went in.

The requisition already holds what the description needs: the must-have requirements and the nice-to-haves, the seniority band, the location and remote policy expressed as a policy rather than a city name, the salary or rate band with its currency, the interview stages, the work authorisation requirement and the client context. Generating from those fields means the output can only say things the requisition actually asserts, and when a field is missing the generator will say the field is missing rather than inventing a plausible sentence to cover it.

A growing list of states and countries require a salary range on a posting, and the rules differ on what counts: whether a range must be good faith, how wide it may be, whether benefits must be described, and which postings are in scope when the role is remote and could be performed from a covered location.

Every generated posting will be checked against the disclosure rules of the places it is being published to, and flagged before it goes out rather than after somebody complains. Where a range is missing, too wide to be meaningful or absent from a posting that will be visible in a covered jurisdiction, the generator will hold the posting and say which rule triggered the flag. The validator that performs the check is a feature in its own right and is documented at /features/pay-transparency-validator, and it will run whether the description was generated or written by hand.

The second check is about wording. Job descriptions routinely exclude people they did not mean to exclude: gendered or coded terms, unnecessary degree requirements on roles that do not need one, an eight-year experience floor that no evidence supports, and physical requirements copied from a template that have nothing to do with the work.

The generator will flag those patterns and explain why each one was flagged, and it will leave the decision with you. It is a review that surfaces the wording, not a filter that rewrites your client's brief without telling anybody. Where a requirement is genuinely necessary, you keep it, and the flag is dismissed with a reason that stays on the requisition.

Agencies write for two audiences at once: the candidate reading the advert and the client who has to recognise their own role in it. A generator that produces one house voice is useless to the second audience.

Output will be produced against a template, and templates will be held per client and per job type. A client with their own format, their own required legal footer and their own boilerplate about benefits gets postings in that format. Length, register and the amount of client detail disclosed will be settings on the template rather than a slider you adjust every time. The same requisition will be renderable as a full description, a shorter job board advert and a candidate-facing summary without retyping any of it.

A description is only useful when it reaches a board. Once generated and approved, the output feeds multi-board posting, so the same content goes to the boards you publish on with the fields each of them expects, rather than being pasted three times with three sets of typos.

The description will also be versioned on the requisition. When a client changes the brief in week three, the new description sits alongside the old one and the record shows which version a given candidate applied against. That matters more than it sounds, because arguments about scope creep on a retained search are usually arguments about which brief was live at the time.

It will not invent a salary band, a benefits package, a team size or a client name that is not on the requisition. It will not write a description for a role you have not specified. It will not claim a company culture it has no information about, because that is where generated job descriptions become indistinguishable from each other.

It will also not be a compliance decision. The pay transparency check flags a posting against the disclosure rules configured for a jurisdiction, and that is a capability, not an assurance that your posting satisfies the law. Publishing decisions stay with you.