I just launched PromptResume — a free AI resume builder at https://promptresume.vercel.app/
The problem
I kept seeing the same issue with AI resume tools: they make your CV look great on paper and fall apart in the interview.
They stuff in buzzwords like "results-driven team player." They invent metrics you never gave them. Every resume sounds the same. And the people using these tools — career switchers, recent grads, anyone who hates writing about themselves — end up with something they can't actually defend when a recruiter asks follow-up questions.
What I built
PromptResume takes a different approach. Instead of a long form or "paste your LinkedIn," it asks 5 questions in plain English:
What did you actually do day-to-day?
What's a problem you're proud of solving?
What skills and tools do you reach for naturally?
Education and other experience?
What are you looking for next — and anything that needs context (gaps, pivots)?
You answer in your own words. A multi-pass AI pipeline turns that into a structured, ATS-safe resume — without fabricating achievements or metrics you didn't provide.
What you get today
Free tier: 5 generations/day, 3 templates, PDF & Word download — no credit card
Pro ($6/month): unlimited generations, premium templates, job-description tailoring
Why I'm posting here
I'm building this solo and want honest feedback from people who've shipped products — not just job seekers.
Does the 5-question flow make sense, or is it too simple?
Would you trust an AI resume tool that refuses to invent numbers?
What would make you actually pay for a resume builder?
Try it at https://promptresume.vercel.app and tell me what breaks. I'll read every reply.
The real shift here isn’t resume generation—it’s forcing truthfulness into a space that’s usually optimized for exaggeration.
Most resume tools fail not because they write poorly, but because they silently distort input into “marketable language.” By anchoring output strictly to user-provided experience, you’re trading cosmetic optimization for defensibility, which matters more in real interviews than on paper.
Thanks for the thoughtful feedback, Aryan! "Trading cosmetic optimization for defensibility" is exactly the philosophy here. I noticed so many people freezing up in interviews because an AI wrote a beautifully embellished resume that they couldn't actually back up under pressure.
Really appreciate you framing it this way—it’s a great way for me to message the product moving forward!
Interesting.
Reading your reply made me think less about resume generation itself and more about what changes once defensibility becomes the product's primary promise instead of optimization.
I don't think I can explain that line of reasoning properly in a thread without oversimplifying it.
If you're interested, what's the best email to reach you on?