The messy-resume output is moderate overall: contact and basic structure survive, but the result is incomplete for soft skills, certifications, and task detail.

◐ Mixedinput onlyTest date not recordedHrFlow
What was measured
Output quality

Is the parsed result clean, complete, and usable overall?

decisive for this rankingtransformation

The whole point is usable structured extraction; clean, complete, usable output is the core measure of success. (3 of 3 judges)

What was given, what came back

Test input: Messy real-world resume — John Kumar · pdf · group: resume-parsing
Input — what we sent
parseur-input3-john-kumar-messyresume-75275a848042.pdf
Messy real-world resume — John Kumar

A poorly formatted, inconsistent real-world resume for John Kumar, used to test robustness against noisy structure, inconsistent dates, and mixed-content sections.

Why this input is hard
  • · messy formatting robustness
  • · section detection fallback
  • · inconsistent date parsing
  • · soft-skills extraction
  • · noise and hallucination control
Output — unretouched
No output artifact
The verdict rests on the tester's written observation alone — no file was captured for this cell.
Provenance
Observation
2cb7ceb9-2755-46c7-8fe5-ca539f649643
Evidence run
cbbef4db-964c-49fa-a57f-a2977822bdfc
Study
Parse resumes into structured data using an API
Research task
86b9jm30n
Tested at
not recorded
Source
first-party
Evidence state
observed
Proof shown
input only
Cost / latency
not captured
Repeat run
not captured
Tester
not captured

The last three rows are honest blanks, not placeholders — our capture has no field for them yet.

Query this
get_evidence({
  tool: "hrflow",
  scenario: "resume-parsing"
})
MCP · mcp.aidemos.com/api/mcp
Free with attribution.
Same input, same check — 5 other tools
measured on Output quality
Real inputs and real outputs, no retouching · every cell queryable via API & MCP · aidemos.com