Reported as "LinkedIn is not showing though the resume has it". The LinkedIn
was never the problem.
Traced on the live application (Mohammad Raza, inbox row 2f81cebc). Its stored
resume_text is 4,555 characters over 2,278 lines, and every one of those lines
is exactly one character long. The CV really does say
LinkedIn:linkedin.com/in/mohammad-raza-digital-marketer
but it is stored as forty separate lines, so nothing that looks for a substring
can find it. Not a link annotation, not an image, not OCR: pypdf's default mode
breaks after every glyph on PDFs whose author positioned each one separately,
which design tools do routinely.
It survived review because a model reads that text fine. The candidate was
classified, matched and scored normally. What fails, silently, is every check
that asks "does this string appear in the resume":
- slugs_from_text finds no profile, so linkedin_slug is stored empty
- _clean_skills drops every skill, since each must appear in the text
- the company and education clamps drop theirs for the same reason
- verify_matched_keywords drops every matched keyword in the ATS engine
despace_line could not help: it rebuilds glyphs padded *within* a line, and
here there is nothing left on a line to rebuild.
is_glyph_fragmented measures the giveaway — the share of non-empty lines that
are a single character — and extract_pdf_text re-extracts with pypdf's layout
mode when it trips. Layout mode is the fallback, never the default: it is
slower and pads ordinary documents with alignment whitespace, so a CV that
extracts cleanly today is untouched. The fallback is checked before it is
trusted; fragmented text still scores a candidate, empty text fails them.
Both extractors had the defect, so the helpers live in app/services/pdf.py,
which owns PDF handling and is already imported by the recruiting path.
Measured against that real CV, before and after:
slugs_from_text [] -> ['mohammad-raza-digital-marketer']
profile_url_from_text None -> https://www.linkedin.com/in/...
lines 2278 -> 61
single-char lines 2278 -> 0
'performance' found False -> True
'google ads' found False -> True
Existing rows keep their broken text; extraction runs at ingest. Re-running
the match on affected rows is what backfills them.
.gitignore had `tests/**` twice and `/backend/tests/**` once. Both suites are
tracked and both run in CI, so the rules were inert for existing files and did
nothing but swallow new ones — this test was invisible to `git status` until
they went. That is also why they are removed rather than negated.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
ahmed.mujtaba
Talha Ahmed