easyai › ChatGPT for recruiters

ChatGPT for recruiters

Use it to write. Never use it to decide who gets through. The moment it scores, ranks or shortlists candidates it becomes an automated employment decision tool, which NYC, Illinois and the EEOC all have something to say about. On the writing side of that line it is genuinely good: job ads, outreach, interview scorecards, and rejections that don't read like form letters.

The line that matters: writing, not deciding

Almost everything that goes wrong with AI in recruiting comes from one mistake, and it is easy to make by accident.

Use it to write. Never use it to decide who gets through. The moment it scores, ranks, shortlists or filters candidates, it stops being a writing tool and becomes an automated employment decision tool, which is a regulated thing in a growing number of places.

New York City requires an independent bias audit and advance notice to candidates before an automated tool is used to screen for a job in the city. Illinois regulates AI analysis of video interviews. The EEOC has been explicit that using a tool that screens people out unevenly can be discrimination regardless of whether anyone intended it, and “the software did it” is not a defence. More rules are arriving, not fewer.

None of that applies to asking it to make your job ad readable. Keep it on the writing side of the line and this is a straightforwardly useful tool. Cross that line and you have a compliance problem that your legal team should have been asked about first.

Don't paste candidates into it

A CV is somebody's personal data, handed to you for one purpose. Pasting it into a consumer AI account is a disclosure to a third party they never agreed to, and under GDPR or similar law it is the kind of thing that gets an employer fined rather than excused.

You can still get help. Describe the role and the gap without the person: “a candidate for a mid-level finance role who has the technical background but has never managed anyone” is a situation, not a person. That gets you the same interview questions with nothing disclosed.

Where it actually earns its keep

Job ads that sound like a human wrote them

Most job ads are a list of demands written by a committee. Give it the real information and ask for the ad, then ask it to cut the parts that don't help anyone.

Write a job ad for a [role] at a [size and type of company].
Here's what the person actually does day to day: [...]
Here's what makes the team good and what makes it hard: [...]
Salary range: [...]

Rules: under 400 words. Plain English. No "rockstar", no "ninja",
no "fast-paced environment", no "wear many hats". Say what the job
is. Then list the three things that genuinely matter, and mark
everything else as nice to have.

That last instruction is the one that changes hiring outcomes. Long requirement lists are well documented as a filter that people apply to themselves, and they lose you good candidates who could do the job. Cutting a list of twelve “requirements” to three is the cheapest improvement available to most ads.

Outreach that isn't the same message everyone else sent

Ask for three different angles rather than one polished message, and pick. Give it the role and one specific, public reason you're contacting this kind of person — the work, not flattery. Ask for under 90 words, no compliments about their “impressive profile”, and one clear question at the end.

Then rewrite a few words yourself. A message that is entirely machine-written reads like one, and the people you most want to reach have learned to spot it.

Interview questions, and a scorecard before you interview

This is the most underrated use and the one that does double duty. Ask for six behavioural questions for the role, then ask it what a weak, adequate and strong answer to each would sound like.

Writing down what good looks like before you meet anyone is the single most effective structural defence against interviewing on gut feel, and gut feel is where bias lives. You get a fairer process and a defensible record, from a task that takes ten minutes.

Rejections that don't read like a form letter

Write the honest reason in one line, then ask for a short, warm, non-generic rejection that says it kindly. Keep it brief and don't invent praise. People remember these, and candidates who are treated decently apply again and tell other people to.

What it gets wrong

It cannot assess anyone. Asked whether a candidate is a good fit it will answer confidently, from a description you wrote, about a person it has never met. That answer is worthless and acting on it is the compliance problem above.
It writes bias back into your ads. Trained on decades of job postings, it reaches for the same coded language. Ask it to flag anything gendered, age-coded or unnecessarily exclusionary, then check it yourself anyway.
It invents salary data. Ranges it quotes may be old or made up. Use real market data.
It doesn't know employment law. Not in your state, not in your country. Anything about contracts, classification or protected characteristics goes to someone qualified.
Everyone has the same tool. If your outreach is unedited, it reads exactly like the four other unedited messages that person got this week.

Ten minutes, on a real ad

Paste this into ChatGPT. It becomes a tutor for one job: fixing an ad you're actually running.

You are my patient tutor. I am a recruiter. I am NOT technical.
Teach me by having me do one thing at a time, not by explaining.

Rules for this whole conversation:
- ONE step. Then STOP and ask what happened. Wait for my answer.
- No jargon. Everyday comparisons only.
- If I say "it didn't work", ask what I saw. Do not move on.
- Keep every message under 150 words.
- Re-read these rules before every message you send me.

Lesson: fix a job ad I am actually running.

1. Ask me to paste in one real job ad. Tell me not to include any
   candidate information.
2. Ask me ONE question: what does this person actually do on a
   Tuesday? Wait for my answer.
3. Rewrite the ad using what I told you. Under 400 words, plain
   English, no cliches. Cut the requirements list to the three
   things that genuinely matter and mark the rest nice to have.
4. STOP and ask me: "What did I cut that you'd want back?" Get me
   to answer.
5. Show me my original ad next to the new one, and tell me which
   single change you think matters most.

Start with step 1. Ask me now, and nothing else.

Step 2 is doing the real work. One question about a Tuesday gets more usable material out of you than any template, because it makes you describe the job instead of the job title.

If it runs ahead, paste: Go back to being the tutor. One step at a time. I was on step 3.

Where to go next

How to write ChatGPT prompts — the four things that turn a bland answer into a usable one.
The free ChatGPT course — six lessons, ten minutes each, nothing to install.

Questions

Can recruiters use ChatGPT to screen candidates?

No, and this is the one hard rule. Screening, scoring, ranking or shortlisting with AI turns it into an automated employment decision tool. New York City requires an independent bias audit and candidate notice for that, Illinois regulates AI analysis of video interviews, and the EEOC treats uneven screening as discrimination whether or not it was intended. Use it to write, never to decide.

Is it safe to paste a CV into ChatGPT?

No. A CV is personal data given to you for one purpose, and pasting it into a consumer account discloses it to a third party the candidate never agreed to. Describe the role and the gap instead of the person; you get the same interview questions with nothing disclosed.

What is ChatGPT actually good for in recruiting?

Writing. Job ads that read like a human wrote them, outreach that isn't identical to everyone else's, interview questions with a scorecard written before you meet anyone, and rejection notes that don't feel like form letters.

Will it write biased job ads?

It can. It learned from decades of job postings and reaches for the same coded language. Ask it to flag anything gendered, age-coded or unnecessarily exclusionary, and still read it yourself. Cutting a twelve-item requirements list to three matters more than any wording fix.

Can it tell me if a candidate is a good fit?

It will answer, confidently, about a person it has never met, based on a description you wrote. The answer is worthless, and acting on it is exactly the regulated use described above.

Can it help me write interview questions?

Yes, and go one step further: ask what a weak, adequate and strong answer to each would sound like. Writing down what good looks like before you meet anyone is the most effective defence against interviewing on gut feel.

Do I need the paid version?

No. Everything here works on the free plan in a web browser.

Want the rest, free?

Six short lessons you paste straight into the tool. One real win in your first ten minutes.

Get the free kit