Principal Technical Program Manager
for section headings. Use - for any list of duties/requirements/benefits. Use
for prose.
We need to preserve ALL substantive information; do not invent or summarize away detail. So we need to include all details from the posting, but we can format them.
We must remove boilerplate: EEO, accommodation, equal opportunity, etc. Also remove "Amazon is an equal opportunity employer..." lines. Also remove "If you have a disability..." etc. Also remove "Learn more about our benefits at ..."? That's a link; maybe we keep as part of benefits? It's a reference; but it's not substantive detail; it's a link. Might be considered boilerplate? It's a pointer to benefits page; we could keep but it's not essential. The rule: Remove cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, and application instructions. The "Learn more about our benefits at ..." is not exactly boilerplate but could be considered navigation/link. Safer to omit it.
Also remove "Company - Annapurna Labs (U.S.) Inc." maybe not needed. Also remove "Job ID: A10564019". Also remove "If the country/region you’re applying in isn’t listed, please contact your Recruiting Partner." That's application instruction; remove.
Also remove "Our inclusive culture empowers Amazonians..." maybe not boilerplate but could be considered fluff; but it's substantive? It's about culture; maybe keep? It's not a specific requirement; but it's part of About The Team? Actually there is a section "About The Team". That includes description of team values. We should preserve that. It's under "About The Team". That could go under About the role or maybe a separate section? The instruction says use headings like About the role, Responsibilities, etc. There's no explicit "About the team" heading; we could incorporate that into About the role or maybe a separate "About the team" but not in list. Better to incorporate into About the role (since it's about the team). We'll include that content in About the role paragraph.
Now we need to ensure we don't repeat job title as heading. So no heading for "Principal Technical Program Manager". Good.
Now structure:
About the role
... paragraphs ...
Then Responsibilities
- ... each responsibility ...
Then Requirements
- ... each basic qualification ...
Then Qualifications
- ... each preferred qualification ...
Then Skills
- ... skill bullets ...
Then Benefits
- ... benefit items ...
Then Pay
... salary ranges and sign-on payments/RSUs ...
We must not include Schedule.
Now we need to extract details.
About the role: combine paragraphs:
"Annapurna Labs designs the custom silicon that powers AWS's machine learning infrastructure, including the Trainium and Inferentia chip families. Our next-generation ML accelerator is a multi-die chiplet using advanced 2nm and 3nm process nodes with state-of-the-art packaging technology, and it is the most complex hardware program Amazon has undertaken. We are looking for a Principal Technical Program Manager to own end-to-end program execution for this chip, from RTL freeze through tape-out and into production readiness. This is not a status-reporting role. You will be the person who connects a sprawling set of engineering workstreams into a single coherent schedule, identifies the real critical path week to week, and drives the cross-functional decisions that keep the program on track. The program spans multiple concurrent silicon development efforts with significant interdependencies across engineering disciplines, external partners, and infrastructure."
Then "About The Team" paragraph:
"The Annapurna Labs ML Accelerator team builds the Trainium and Inferentia silicon that trains and serves machine learning models across AWS. We work at the intersection of chip architecture, physical design, verification, and infrastructure to deliver products that push the boundaries of performance and efficiency for our customers. Our team values people who bring strong technical judgment, clear communication, and a willingness to get into the details. If you want to shape how Amazon builds its most ambitious hardware and work alongside talented engineers solving real problems at scale, this is the role for you."
We can combine into About the role section.
Now Responsibilities: list from "Key job responsibilities":
- Own the integrated schedule and critical path analysis across multiple die tape-outs through engineering samples and production ramp.
- Understand dependency chains deeply enough to calculate the impact of any slip or pull-in, and update the timeline weekly with real data.
- Drive the weekly chip status cadence by synthesizing inputs from RTL/DV, physical design, packaging, power, infrastructure, and post-silicon teams into a single view that tells leadership where we actually stand, including what is getting worse and what needs action.
- Track verification convergence as a leading indicator by monitoring the progression from feature completion through RTL closure, bug trends, and regression pass rates by block.
- Recognize when convergence is stalling and drive the engineering response before downstream milestones are affected.
- Manage the external design partner interface, owning the netlist delivery calendar, tracking your partner's physical design timeline, and negotiating schedule trades with a clear understanding of downstream cost.
- Drive infrastructure readiness and external IP delivery by partnering with compute and EDA platform teams on capacity planning, and tracking third-party PHY, memory interface, and controller IP deliveries against consuming blocks to escalate gaps before they become tape-out critical.
Also "A day in the life" description could be considered responsibilities but it's more narrative; we could include as part of About the role or maybe as a separate paragraph under About the role. The instruction says preserve ALL substantive information; we could include that as a paragraph under About the role or maybe as a separate "Typical day" but not a heading. Safer to include as part of About the role paragraph after the responsibilities? But we already have responsibilities list; we could add a paragraph after responsibilities describing a day in the life. However the instruction says use for prose. So we can add a
after responsibilities for "A day in the life". But we must not create extra sections unless heading. So we can just add a
after responsibilities.
Now Requirements: Basic Qualifications list:
- 10+ years of hands-on work managing complex technology projects experience
- 10+ years of working directly with engineering teams experience
- Deep working knowledge of the chip development lifecycle: RTL verification milestones, physical design convergence, DFT, and timing closure.
- Experience managing programs with external design partners and IP vendors where you don't control the resources but own the outcome.
- Demonstrated ability to build and maintain integrated schedules with real dependency modeling — not just Gantt charts, but an understanding of which paths have float and which don't.
- Strong technical communication skills: ability to present crisp status to VP-level audiences, distinguishing signal from noise, and framing decisions clearly.
Note: The last bullet also appears as a skill; but it's in Basic Qualifications. We'll keep it there.
Now Qualifications: Preferred Qualifications list:
- Experience with multi-die / chiplet / advanced packaging programs (2.5D/3D integration).
- Familiarity with HBM integration, die-to-die interfaces, or high-speed serial subsystems.
- Experience with leading-edge foundry nodes and their specific flow and schedule characteristics.
- Background in ML accelerator or high-performance compute silicon.
- Experience driving infrastructure capacity planning for large-scale chip development programs.
Now Skills: We could extract skills not already covered: maybe "Ability to build and maintain integrated schedules with real dependency modeling", "Strong technical communication skills", "Ability to present crisp status to VP-level audiences", "Distinguishing signal from noise", "Framing decisions clearly". However these are already in Basic Qualifications. To avoid duplication, we could still include them but risk duplication. The instruction: Preserve ALL substantive information; do NOT invent or summarize away detail. Duplication is okay if it's in the source? The source has those statements in Basic Qualifications; we could keep them only there. For Skills section we could include other skills like "Ability to connect engineering workstreams into a coherent schedule", "Identify real critical path week to week", "Drive cross-functional decisions", "Track verification convergence", "Manage external design partner interface", "Negotiate schedule trades", "Drive infrastructure readiness". But those are responsibilities. Might be redundant.
Better to not include Skills section if we don't have distinct skills beyond those already captured. However the instruction says we can include Skills section if posting has real, specific content for it. The posting does not have a explicit Skills heading, but we could argue that the bullet points under Basic Qualifications and Preferred Qualifications already cover skills. To avoid creating a thin section, we might omit Skills
for prose. We need to preserve ALL substantive information; do not invent or summarize away detail. So we need to include all details from the posting, but we can format them. We must remove boilerplate: EEO, accommodation, equal opportunity, etc. Also remove "Amazon is an equal opportunity employer..." lines. Also remove "If you have a disability..." etc. Also remove "Learn more about our benefits at ..."? That's a link; maybe we keep as part of benefits? It's a reference; but it's not substantive detail; it's a link. Might be considered boilerplate? It's a pointer to benefits page; we could keep but it's not essential. The rule: Remove cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, and application instructions. The "Learn more about our benefits at ..." is not exactly boilerplate but could be considered navigation/link. Safer to omit it. Also remove "Company - Annapurna Labs (U.S.) Inc." maybe not needed. Also remove "Job ID: A10564019". Also remove "If the country/region you’re applying in isn’t listed, please contact your Recruiting Partner." That's application instruction; remove. Also remove "Our inclusive culture empowers Amazonians..." maybe not boilerplate but could be considered fluff; but it's substantive? It's about culture; maybe keep? It's not a specific requirement; but it's part of About The Team? Actually there is a section "About The Team". That includes description of team values. We should preserve that. It's under "About The Team". That could go under About the role or maybe a separate section? The instruction says use headings like About the role, Responsibilities, etc. There's no explicit "About the team" heading; we could incorporate that into About the role or maybe a separate "About the team" but not in list. Better to incorporate into About the role (since it's about the team). We'll include that content in About the role paragraph. Now we need to ensure we don't repeat job title as heading. So no heading for "Principal Technical Program Manager". Good. Now structure:
About the role
... paragraphs ...
ThenResponsibilities
- ... each responsibility ...
Requirements
- ... each basic qualification ...
Qualifications
- ... each preferred qualification ...
Skills
- ... skill bullets ...
Benefits
- ... benefit items ...
Pay
... salary ranges and sign-on payments/RSUs ...
We must not include Schedule. Now we need to extract details. About the role: combine paragraphs: "Annapurna Labs designs the custom silicon that powers AWS's machine learning infrastructure, including the Trainium and Inferentia chip families. Our next-generation ML accelerator is a multi-die chiplet using advanced 2nm and 3nm process nodes with state-of-the-art packaging technology, and it is the most complex hardware program Amazon has undertaken. We are looking for a Principal Technical Program Manager to own end-to-end program execution for this chip, from RTL freeze through tape-out and into production readiness. This is not a status-reporting role. You will be the person who connects a sprawling set of engineering workstreams into a single coherent schedule, identifies the real critical path week to week, and drives the cross-functional decisions that keep the program on track. The program spans multiple concurrent silicon development efforts with significant interdependencies across engineering disciplines, external partners, and infrastructure." Then "About The Team" paragraph: "The Annapurna Labs ML Accelerator team builds the Trainium and Inferentia silicon that trains and serves machine learning models across AWS. We work at the intersection of chip architecture, physical design, verification, and infrastructure to deliver products that push the boundaries of performance and efficiency for our customers. Our team values people who bring strong technical judgment, clear communication, and a willingness to get into the details. If you want to shape how Amazon builds its most ambitious hardware and work alongside talented engineers solving real problems at scale, this is the role for you." We can combine into About the role section. Now Responsibilities: list from "Key job responsibilities": - Own the integrated schedule and critical path analysis across multiple die tape-outs through engineering samples and production ramp. - Understand dependency chains deeply enough to calculate the impact of any slip or pull-in, and update the timeline weekly with real data. - Drive the weekly chip status cadence by synthesizing inputs from RTL/DV, physical design, packaging, power, infrastructure, and post-silicon teams into a single view that tells leadership where we actually stand, including what is getting worse and what needs action. - Track verification convergence as a leading indicator by monitoring the progression from feature completion through RTL closure, bug trends, and regression pass rates by block. - Recognize when convergence is stalling and drive the engineering response before downstream milestones are affected. - Manage the external design partner interface, owning the netlist delivery calendar, tracking your partner's physical design timeline, and negotiating schedule trades with a clear understanding of downstream cost. - Drive infrastructure readiness and external IP delivery by partnering with compute and EDA platform teams on capacity planning, and tracking third-party PHY, memory interface, and controller IP deliveries against consuming blocks to escalate gaps before they become tape-out critical. Also "A day in the life" description could be considered responsibilities but it's more narrative; we could include as part of About the role or maybe as a separate paragraph under About the role. The instruction says preserve ALL substantive information; we could include that as a paragraph under About the role or maybe as a separate "Typical day" but not a heading. Safer to include as part of About the role paragraph after the responsibilities? But we already have responsibilities list; we could add a paragraph after responsibilities describing a day in the life. However the instruction says usefor prose. So we can add a
after responsibilities for "A day in the life". But we must not create extra sections unless heading. So we can just add a
after responsibilities. Now Requirements: Basic Qualifications list: - 10+ years of hands-on work managing complex technology projects experience - 10+ years of working directly with engineering teams experience - Deep working knowledge of the chip development lifecycle: RTL verification milestones, physical design convergence, DFT, and timing closure. - Experience managing programs with external design partners and IP vendors where you don't control the resources but own the outcome. - Demonstrated ability to build and maintain integrated schedules with real dependency modeling — not just Gantt charts, but an understanding of which paths have float and which don't. - Strong technical communication skills: ability to present crisp status to VP-level audiences, distinguishing signal from noise, and framing decisions clearly. Note: The last bullet also appears as a skill; but it's in Basic Qualifications. We'll keep it there. Now Qualifications: Preferred Qualifications list: - Experience with multi-die / chiplet / advanced packaging programs (2.5D/3D integration). - Familiarity with HBM integration, die-to-die interfaces, or high-speed serial subsystems. - Experience with leading-edge foundry nodes and their specific flow and schedule characteristics. - Background in ML accelerator or high-performance compute silicon. - Experience driving infrastructure capacity planning for large-scale chip development programs. Now Skills: We could extract skills not already covered: maybe "Ability to build and maintain integrated schedules with real dependency modeling", "Strong technical communication skills", "Ability to present crisp status to VP-level audiences", "Distinguishing signal from noise", "Framing decisions clearly". However these are already in Basic Qualifications. To avoid duplication, we could still include them but risk duplication. The instruction: Preserve ALL substantive information; do NOT invent or summarize away detail. Duplication is okay if it's in the source? The source has those statements in Basic Qualifications; we could keep them only there. For Skills section we could include other skills like "Ability to connect engineering workstreams into a coherent schedule", "Identify real critical path week to week", "Drive cross-functional decisions", "Track verification convergence", "Manage external design partner interface", "Negotiate schedule trades", "Drive infrastructure readiness". But those are responsibilities. Might be redundant. Better to not include Skills section if we don't have distinct skills beyond those already captured. However the instruction says we can include Skills section if posting has real, specific content for it. The posting does not have a explicit Skills heading, but we could argue that the bullet points under Basic Qualifications and Preferred Qualifications already cover skills. To avoid creating a thin section, we might omit Skills