Software Engineer, (Internal Audit) [All Levels]

We need to output HTML fragment with sections: About Us, About The Role, What You'll Do, Who You Are (All Levels), Higher-Level Responsibilities, Experience, What Should Excite You, Benefits, Compensation Range? The instructions: Use

for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule). They gave examples but we can use headings matching content. Must not repeat job title as heading. Must not include Job ID etc. Remove boilerplate. Must include a section only when posting has real specific content. Must not emit heading with filler. Must preserve all substantive info. We need to decide which sections to include based on content. We have sections: About Us, About The Role, What You'll Do, Who You Are (All Levels), Higher-Level Responsibilities, Experience, What Should Excite You, Benefits, Compensation Range. We need to format each as

heading, then content as

or

• for lists. We must not include sections like Pay or Schedule unless present. Compensation Range is present: "Compensation Range: $160K - $280K". That is specific, so we can include a Pay section? They said use heading Pay for compensation. Could use

  Pay

  with that range. Or we could use Compensation Range heading but they said use Pay. Probably better to follow instruction: Use

  for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule). So we should map content to those headings where appropriate. But we can also use other headings if they match content? The instruction says use those headings for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule). It seems they expect those headings. However they also say "include a section ONLY when the posting has real, specific content for it". So we need to decide which of those headings have content. We have About Us content -> could map to About the role? Actually About Us is separate. They gave example "About the role". But we have About Us and About The Role. Could we use About the role for the role description? And maybe About Us could be omitted? But we need to preserve all substantive information. About Us is substantive. Could we put it under a heading like About Us? The instruction didn't forbid other headings, just gave examples. It says "use

  for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule)." So we can use other headings as long as they are

  . Probably fine. Thus we will output sections with appropriate headings: About Us, About The Role, What You'll Do, Who You Are, Higher-Level Responsibilities, Experience, What Should Excite You, Benefits, Pay. We need to convert lists to

  • . Identify bullet points. Let's extract content. About Us paragraph: "Fieldguide is establishing a new state of trust for global commerce and capital markets by automating and streamlining the work of assurance and audit practitioners—specifically in cybersecurity, privacy, and financial audits. We build software for the people who enable trust between businesses. We're based in San Francisco, CA, and built remote-first. We're backed by Goldman Sachs Alternatives, Bessemer Venture Partners, 8VC, Floodgate, Y Combinator, and more. Over 50 of the top 100 accounting and consulting firms trust Fieldguide to power mission-critical work. We value diversity — in backgrounds and in experiences. We need people from all backgrounds and walks of life to help build the future of audit and advisory. Fieldguide's team is inclusive, driven, humble and supportive. We are deliberate and self-reflective about the kind of team and culture that we are building, seeking teammates that are not only strong in their own aptitudes but care deeply about supporting each other's growth." That's prose, put in

    . About The Role: paragraph: "You'll join a genuine 0→1 team on the ground floor of one of the company's biggest new bets. You will work full-stack on long-horizon agents, ship features that do real audit work, and work alongside practitioners. Depending on your experience and what you're looking to own, you may join building within a major agent area, owning one end-to-end, or setting technical direction for agentic audit work across the team. We're hiring across all levels and will calibrate during interviews based on scope and demonstrated experience." That's prose. What You'll Do: list of bullet points: - Design and build agent-driven experiences for SOX control testing, deciding where autonomy makes sense and where the auditor stays in the loop - Own complex, end-to-end workstreams across the full stack - Make long agentic runs trustworthy: improve reliability, repeatability, performance, and observability so the same evidence produces the same defensible conclusion every time - Turn agent output into finished audit deliverables, including structured workpapers that adapt to whatever template a firm brings - Ship code from day one and ramp quickly into full ownership of significant product areas - Collaborate daily with product managers, designers, and SOX subject matter experts to work through difficult domain problems - Help shape technical direction and contribute to how the team thinks about agentic systems, AI tooling, and engineering best practices We'll make

    • . Who You Are (All Levels): bullet points: - A strong full-stack engineer who writes code every day and wants to continue doing so - You've built with LLMs in production, not just in prototypes. You know what breaks when real users and real documents hit an agent - Comfortable in ambiguous, fast-moving environments where you figure things out as you go - Energized by 0→1 work: you'd rather define the problem than inherit a spec - High degree of ownership; you don't wait to be told what to do - A genuine team player across the organization, not just within engineering. You'll work directly with PM, design, domain experts, and customer-facing teams, and you treat that as the best part of the job - Able to pick up complex domain concepts quickly. You don't need to know SOX or internal controls, but you're the kind of person who can internalize it fast - Already using AI coding tools in your workflow and curious about where agentic approaches create real leverage We'll list. Higher-Level Responsibilities: two sub-sections: At The Senior Level, You May ... and At The Staff Level, You May ... We could combine into a single section with subheadings? But we only allowed

      headings. Could we have nested headings? Probably not needed. We could make a single Higher-Level Responsibilities section with paragraphs describing both levels. Or we could split into two sections: Senior Level Responsibilities and Staff Level Responsibilities. But instruction says prefer few substantive sections over many thin ones. So combine. Thus Higher-Level Responsibilities: prose combining both. Content: At The Senior Level, You May Lead complex projects or systems, setting technical direction and ensuring long-term health Collaborate with PMs and designers to shape roadmaps and define architectural tradeoffs Serve as a domain expert within one or more technical areas (e.g., agent orchestration, evaluation and quality, document processing, frontend architecture) Mentor other engineers and help raise the technical bar across the team At The Staff Level, You May Drive company-level technical initiatives and influence cross-team architecture Set and champion engineering standards for scalability, security, and performance Partner with engineering and product leadership to define long-term technical strategy Serve as a trusted advisor to leaders across Engineering, Product, and Design Represent Fieldguide externally through writing, speaking, and open-source contributions We'll make

      • for each bullet. Experience: Must-have and Nice-to-have and Not a Fit and What Should Excite You? Actually Experience section includes Must-have, Nice-to-have, Not a Fit. Then there is separate "What Should Excite You". We'll treat Experience as a section with subheadings? Could split into Must-have, Nice-to-have, Not a Fit as sub-sections but that would be many thin sections. Better to combine into one Experience section with paragraphs for each category. Thus Experience: prose listing Must-have, Nice-to-have, Not a Fit. Must-have: Shipped LLM-backed product features to production against real users; Comfortable full-stack, with enough backend depth to work in agent orchestration; Autonomy working from an ambiguous spec; A collaborative mindset with an ability to work across PM, design, and domain experts; Willingness to develop an Applied AI skillset including writing evals, using LLM observability tools, and being thoughtful about quality Nice-to-have: Startup experience, as a founder or as an early engineer; A track record of 0→1 projects you took from nothing to something people use; Experience working directly with customers, and comfort being in the room when they use what you built; Experience in internal audit, SOX, financial services, accounting, or compliance; Familiarity with our stack: TypeScript, React, GraphQL, Node.js, PostgreSQL, Python, and Temporal; Experience with document processing, PDF/Excel manipulation, or evaluation frameworks for model output Not a Fit: If You’re not interested in deeply learning about Agents; You’ve never built a product to scale; You need a fully specified ticket to start; You'd rather not be in the room with customers and domain experts We'll make
        • for each bullet under each subcategory? Could just list all bullets with headings inside

          ? Better to keep structure: maybe

          Must-have:

          then
          . But we cannot use ? Not prohibited. We can include inline formatting. Simpler: just list all bullets with preceding text? Might lose clarity. But we can embed headings as

          Must-have:

          then list. Given instruction to output only HTML fragment, we can include . What Should Excite You: bullet points: - 0→1 on the biggest bet: You're building the agent and the product from scratch, on the ground floor of where the company is going - Real audit stakes: Your work directly affects what firms put in front of their clients, and what a reviewer is willing to sign - Customer proximity: Design-partner firms and an embedded SOX expert use what you ship within days of it landing - High trust, high autonomy: You're given ambiguous problems and trusted to define the plan We'll list. Benefits: bullet points: - Competitive compensation with equity - Comprehensive health and wellness benefits - Flexible time off and work schedules - Technology reimbursements - 401(k) plan - Twice-yearly in-person offsites across the U.S. - Wellness benefits starting on your first day We'll list. Pay: Compensation Range: $160K - $280K. We'll put in

          . Now ensure we don't include boilerplate like EEO etc. Not present. Now produce HTML. We'll start with

          About Us

          ...

          Then

          About The Role

          ...

          Then

          What You'll Do

          ...
          Then

          Who You Are

          ...
          Then

          Higher-Level Responsibilities

          ...
          Then

          Experience

          maybe we need subheadings inside. We'll do

          Must-have:

          ...
          etc. Then

          What Should Excite You

          ...
          Then

          Benefits