Product Engineer - AI Finance App

We need to output HTML fragment with sections: About, The Role (maybe "About the role"? Actually they said use

for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule). We need to include sections only when posting has real specific content. The posting includes: About Doit (company description). Then "The Role" description. Then "What You'll Own" (list of duties). Then "What We're Looking For" (requirements/qualifications). Then "The Kind of Builder We Want" (maybe skills or qualities). Then "This Role Is Not For" (maybe not needed). Then "Location" (remote but US based). Then "Language". Then "Interview Process". Also maybe "Benefits", "Pay", "Schedule" not present, so we should not include those sections. We must not repeat job title as heading. No Job ID. Remove boilerplate (cookie/navigation/legal/EEO etc). There's none. We need to use

for section headings. Use

• for any list of duties/requirements/benefits. Use

  for prose. We need to preserve all substantive information. So we need to capture all content. Let's parse sections: - About Doit: paragraph(s). We'll put under

  About the role

  ? Actually "About the role" is generic; but we have company description. Could use "About the role" heading for company overview? The instruction says use

  for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule). So we should use those exact headings when appropriate. For company description, maybe "About the role" is appropriate. We'll put that. - The Role: maybe we can treat as "Responsibilities"? But they have a separate "What You'll Own" which is responsibilities. So we could have a section "Responsibilities" for What You'll Own. And maybe "The Role" description could be a brief summary under "About the role"? Hmm. Better: Use headings as they map: About the role (company overview). Responsibilities (What You'll Own). Requirements (What We're Looking For). Qualifications (maybe The Kind of Builder We Want). Skills (maybe also part of Kind of Builder). But we need to avoid thin sections. Let's think. We have content: - About Doit: company mission, vision, etc. - The Role: description of role (product engineers to own product areas within Doit's AI Finance App...). This is more like an overview of role. - What You'll Own: list of duties (own product areas, define user problems, etc.) -> responsibilities. - What We're Looking For: list of experience and skills -> requirements/qualifications. - The Kind of Builder We Want: list of traits -> maybe skills or qualifications. - This Role Is Not For: list of anti-traits -> maybe not needed; could be omitted as not substantive? It's still substantive but maybe we can include under "Requirements" as negative? But instruction: preserve ALL substantive information; do NOT invent or summarize away detail. So we should include it. Could be a section "What we're not looking for" but not in allowed headings. Could we put under "Requirements" as a list? Might be okay to add a subsection? But we must only use allowed headings? The instruction says use

  for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule). It doesn't forbid other headings, but suggests using those. Safer to stick to those headings. We could map "This Role Is Not For" to "Requirements" as a list of what not to do, but that might be confusing. Perhaps better to create a section "Requirements" and include both positive and negative points. But we need to preserve all info; we can include negative points as part of requirements. - Location: remote but US based. This could be placed under a short

  maybe after sections. Not a heading. - Language: English required. Could be a short

  . - Interview Process: steps. Could be a section maybe "Interview Process" but not in allowed headings. Could we treat as "Skills"? Not appropriate. Maybe we can create a heading "Interview Process" as

  even though not listed? The instruction says use

  for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule). The "e.g." suggests examples, not exhaustive list. So we can use other headings as needed, but better to follow examples. However, we need to include interview process info; we could put under a heading "Process" or just as a

  after a heading like "Interview Process". I'd say it's okay to use

  Interview Process

  . Similarly, Location and Language could be under

  Location

  and

  Language

  . But they said prefer a few substantive sections over many thin ones. So maybe combine Location and Language into a single

  after a heading like "Logistics". But we need to preserve info. Could create a section "Details" with paragraphs. Given the instruction to prefer few substantive sections, we could have: - About the role (company overview) - Responsibilities (What You'll Own) - Requirements (What We're Looking For + The Kind of Builder We Want + This Role Is Not For) - Details (Location, Language, Interview Process) But we need to use

  for each section heading. Use

  • for lists. Let's craft. First, About the role: combine the initial paragraphs about Doit (mission, vision, history). We'll put as

    content. Second, Responsibilities: list from "What You'll Own". Each bullet as

  • . Third, Requirements: combine "What We're Looking For", "The Kind of Builder We Want", "This Role Is Not For". Could be a mix of positive and negative. We'll list as
  • items, maybe separate subheadings? But we cannot add extra headings inside? Could add

    headings inside? Might be okay but better to keep simple list. We'll just list all points as

  • . Ensure we preserve all specifics. Let's extract each bullet. From "What We're Looking For": - Experience as Product Engineer, Product Owner, founder, growth/product operator or similar role. - Strong product sense and ability to simplify complex workflows. - Able to work with engineers and designers to ship real products. - Comfortable with metrics, user feedback, experiments and post-launch learning. - Strong writing, prioritization and stakeholder management. - High ownership and ability to drive work with limited guidance. - Experience in fintech, insurance, payments, consumer apps or high-growth products is a strong advantage. From "The Kind of Builder We Want": - Starts from user problems, not feature lists. - Can make decisions with incomplete information. - Knows how to ship quickly and learn after launch. - Works well with engineering without hiding behind process. - Honest about what changed because of their work versus wider team effort. From "This Role Is Not For": - People who only write decks and do not drive execution. - PMs who cannot work deeply with engineering. - Candidates who need perfect data before making decisions. - People who launch features and then stop caring. - PMs who exaggerate business impact without understanding attribution. We'll include all. Now Details section: Location, Language, Interview Process. Location: "This role is remote, but candidates must be based in United States. We are hiring specifically for this market, so applicants should already be based in United States." Language: "English is our main working language across global teams. Strong English communication is required." Interview Process: list steps: 1. Online assessment or practical task 2. Role-specific interview 3. CEO / final round Additional note: "For strong candidates, we aim to complete the process and make an offer within 1 week from the start of the interview process. Candidates who complete assessments quickly will be prioritized." We'll include that as prose after list. Now format. We'll output:

    About the role

    ...

    Responsibilities

    • Own product areas across insurance, payments, savings, investing, travel or other financial services.
    • Define user problems, product scope, success metrics, roadmap and launch plans.
    • Work with engineering, design, data, operations, compliance and business teams.
    • Turn complex financial products into simple, usable customer journeys.
    • Use data, feedback, research and production issues to improve product decisions.
    • Launch features, monitor performance and drive iterations.
    • Make trade-offs between speed, user experience, business impact, compliance and operational complexity.

    Requirements

    • Experience as Product Engineer, Product Owner, founder, growth/product operator or similar role.
    • Strong product sense and ability to simplify complex workflows.
    • Able to work with engineers and designers to ship real products.
    • Comfortable with metrics, user feedback, experiments and post-launch learning.
    • Strong writing, prioritization and stakeholder management.
    • High ownership and ability to drive work with limited guidance.
    • Experience in fintech, insurance, payments, consumer apps or high-growth products is a strong advantage.
    • Starts from user problems, not feature lists.
    • Can make decisions with incomplete information.
    • Knows how to ship quickly and learn after launch.
    • Works well with engineering without hiding behind process.
    • Honest about what changed because of their work versus wider team effort.
    • People who only write decks and do not drive execution.
    • PMs who cannot work deeply with engineering.
    • Candidates who need perfect data before making decisions.
    • People who launch features and then stop caring.
    • PMs who exaggerate business impact without understanding attribution.

    Details

    This role is remote, but candidates must be based in United States. We are hiring specifically for this market, so applicants should already be based in United States.

    English is our main working language across global teams. Strong English communication is required.

    1. Online assessment or practical task
    2. Role-specific interview
    3. CEO / final round

    For strong candidates, we aim to complete the process and make an offer within 1 week from the start of the interview process. Candidates who complete assessments quickly will be prioritized.

    Check we didn't miss any substantive info: The initial "The Role" paragraph: "We are looking for product engineers to own product areas within Doit's AI Finance App. This role is for builders who can understand users, define product direction, work with engineering and design, launch fast and keep improving after release." This is somewhat covered by responsibilities but also could be included as a brief overview under About the role or Responsibilities. We haven't included that explicitly. Should we add it? It's substantive. Could add a

    under About the role after company description, or as a separate short paragraph before Responsibilities. Let's add a paragraph after About the role: maybe include that as part of About the role? Actually About the role currently is company description. We could add a short paragraph about the role there. But the heading "About the role" could encompass both company and role overview. Let's incorporate that paragraph into About the role

    after company description. Thus About the role

    will contain both company description and role overview. Let's craft About the role paragraph: "We are focused on reinventing how people spend, save, invest