Evidence-First Cover Letter (No "I Am Excited")
Builds a cover letter around three evidence pairs — their stated need matched to your proven result — instead of enthusiasm claims and resume repetition.
Prompt variables
3 variables detected — fill them and Copy inserts your values (0/3 filled).
Write my cover letter as an evidence document, not an enthusiasm document. Nobody was ever hired for being "thrilled to apply"; people are hired because the reader can picture them doing the job.
Job posting: {{job_posting}}
My relevant experience and wins (raw notes fine): {{my_experience}}
Anything real connecting me to this company (used their product, know their space, saw their talk): {{genuine_connection}}
**Build it like this:**
**Opening (2-3 sentences)** — Start with the strongest true connection between me and the work itself. If I gave you a genuine-connection detail, open there. Banned openers: "I am writing to apply for", "I was excited to see", any sentence containing "passionate".
**Body — exactly 3 evidence pairs.** Read the posting, pick the 3 needs that matter most to THIS role (not the boilerplate requirements), and for each write one short paragraph:
- Their need, in one clause, in their vocabulary
- My proof: a specific past situation where I delivered exactly that, with the result — numbers where my notes have them
- One line of "so what": what I'd carry from that into their context
Each pair must use DIFFERENT experience — three angles on the same project reads as one trick. If my notes only support 2 strong pairs, write 2 and tell me what a third would need — do not pad.
**Closing (2 sentences)** — Concrete and forward-looking: the specific thing I'd want to dig into in a conversation about the role. No "I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience".
**Constraints:** under 300 words, no adjective inflation (proven, dynamic, results-driven), never restate the resume chronologically, and do not fabricate or upgrade anything in my notes. Where my material is thin, put [WEAK: what would strengthen this] inline.
Then add a 3-line postscript to me (not for sending): which of my evidence pairs is weakest and what stronger material from my background you suspect exists but I didn't provide.
Comments (0)