Wildcard Application
for section headings. Use - for any list of duties/requirements/benefits, and
for prose.
We need to preserve all substantive information; do not invent or summarize away detail. Remove cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, and application instructions.
We need to include a section ONLY when posting has real, specific content for it — never emit a heading followed by filler/placeholder text (e.g., "commensurate with experience", "not specified", "N/A", "varies", "TBD") and never create Pay/Schedule/Benefits sections unless posting actually states them. There's no explicit Pay or Schedule, so we should not create those sections.
We need to decide which sections to include: About Us, About This Role, Who We're Looking For, Where You Might Land, Two Questions, What we offer, Our Values, Read More About Us? The "Read More About Us" seems like a list of links: "Learn about our startup journeyLearn what we are doingLearn about our customers". That's substantive? It's more like navigation; but it's content. However it might be considered boilerplate? It's not EEO. It's more like internal links. The instruction says remove cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, and application instructions. Navigation might be considered boilerplate? It says "navigation". The "Read More About Us Learn about our startup journeyLearn what we are doingLearn about our customers" seems like navigation links. Probably should remove as navigation boilerplate. Also "Together, we stay curious, learn quickly, and keep raising the bar. If you want to grow, make an impact that truly matters, and be part of a team that's shaping the future of public infrastructure, you'll feel right at home at Cyvl." That's prose, could be part of About Us? It's after the values? Actually after values there is that paragraph. It's substantive, not boilerplate. We'll keep it maybe as part of About Us or a separate section? Could be part of About Us. But we already have About Us earlier. Might duplicate. Better to keep as a separate section like "Our Culture" but not specified heading. The instruction says use headings for section headings like About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule. But we can also use other headings? It says use
for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule). It implies we should use those headings when applicable, but we can also use other headings? Probably we should stick to those headings where relevant. For "About Us" we can use About Us
. For "About This Role" we can use About the role
(they said About the role as example). But the posting says "About This Role". We'll map to About the role. For "Who We're Looking For" maybe map to Requirements or Qualifications? Could be "Requirements". But we have a list of builder types etc. That's more like qualifications. We'll use Qualifications
. For "Where You Might Land" maybe map to "Skills" or "Teams"? Not exactly. Could be "Skills"? But it's about teams. Could be "Teams". Not in list. Might be better to create a custom heading? The instruction says use those headings for section headings (e.g...). It doesn't forbid other headings, but says use for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule). Likely they expect us to use those headings when appropriate. For "Where You Might Land" maybe it's about where you could fit; could be considered "Skills"? Not really. Could be "Teams". Since not in list, maybe we should not create a section if it doesn't map? But we have substantive content. The instruction: "Prefer a few substantive sections over many thin ones." So we could combine some.
We could have sections: About Us, About the role, Qualifications, What we offer, Our Values. Also include the Two Questions as part of About the role? Or as a separate section maybe "Application Questions"? Not in list. Could be part of About the role. The Two Questions are instructions for applicants; they are application instructions, which we should remove? The instruction says remove application instructions. Indeed: "Remove cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, and application instructions." So the Two Questions are application instructions; we should remove them. So we should not include that section.
Thus we drop the Two Questions.
Now "Read More About Us" maybe navigation; remove.
Now "At Cyvl, we welcome diversity..." EEO; remove.
Now we need to preserve all substantive information: About Us paragraph, About This Role paragraph, Who We're Looking For (list of builder types), Where You Might Land (list of teams), What we offer (list of benefits), Our Values (list of values), plus the closing paragraph about curiosity etc.
We need to format lists with - . For prose, use
.
We need to decide headings.
Let's map:
- About Us:
About Us
... (the paragraph). Also maybe include the closing paragraph about curiosity etc under About Us? Could be separate but we can append.
- About the role:
About the role
... (the paragraph about "There isn't one...").
- Qualifications:
Qualifications
... (the "Who We're Looking For" paragraph). Then maybe a list of the builder types? Actually the "Who We're Looking For" includes bullet-like sentences: "Builders. You've started something...". Could be formatted as
- each.
- Where You Might Land: Could be
Teams
(though not in list). But we could treat as "Skills"? Not accurate. Maybe we can make a section "Where you might land" as a custom heading but risk violating instruction. However instruction says use for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule). It doesn't say we cannot use other headings, but gives examples. Safer to stick to those. Where you might land could be considered "Skills"? Not really. Could be "Responsibilities"? Not. Could be "Requirements"? Not. Could be "About the role"? Already used. Could be "Qualifications"? Already used. Could be "Benefits"? No. Could be "Pay"? No. Could be "Schedule"? No.
Thus maybe we should not create a separate section for Where You Might Land; we could incorporate that info into Qualifications or About the role? But it's distinct: teams where you might land. Could be included under Qualifications as additional detail. However the instruction says preserve ALL substantive information; we can embed it in a paragraph under Qualifications.
Similarly, the closing paragraph about curiosity could be part of About Us.
Thus final sections: About Us, About the role, Qualifications, What we offer, Our Values.
Now we need to format lists.
Let's extract content.
About Us paragraph:
"The best infrastructure is invisible. You only notice it when it fails. For decades, the people responsible for our roads, bridges, and sidewalks have been asked to manage the physical world with tools that can't see it. CYVL is the Physical AI company changing that. We help governments build infrastructure faster with hardware, software, and AI, turning street-level capture into living intelligence that 500+ cities and towns across the country use to see what's out there, direct the work, and fix problems before they fail. We believe in a future where infrastructure keeps up with society. Every street, sidewalk, bridge, everywhere. The proof isn't a dashboard. It's a smoother commute, a safer walk to school, public dollars going where they matter most. We're a fast-moving team in Boston building for the real world. If you believe technology's highest calling is public good, come build with us."
We'll put that in
.
About the role paragraph:
"There isn't one. That's the point. This posting is for people who are excited about Cyvl but they don't fit into anything currently open. Maybe you've built a company, and you're looking for the next hard problem. Maybe you've spent fifteen years in public works, and you know exactly why our customers do what they do. Maybe your skill set doesn't have a clean job title yet. Apply here. We read everyone. When a role opens that fits you, you're the first call. Sometimes the role doesn't exist yet, and we build it around the person."
We'll put that in
.
Qualifications: The "Who We're Looking For" section:
"Builders. You've started something. A company, a team, a product, a program inside a company that didn't want one. You're comfortable with no playbook and no permission. Operators. You make things run. You've scaled a function, fixed a broken process, or taken something from chaos to boring in the best way. Deep technical talent. Perception, LiDAR, geospatial, AI, embedded systems, data infrastructure. You've solved hard problems in the physical world, not just on a screen. Domain experts. You've worked in public works, transportation, civil engineering, or government procurement. You know how a capital plan actually gets approved and what a DPW director is up against in a council meeting."
We could format each bold label as a list item. Let's make
- Builders. You've started something. A company, a team, a product, a program inside a company that didn't want one. You're comfortable with no playbook and no permission.
etc.
We'll need to preserve the sentences exactly.
Now "Where You Might Land" content: "Our teams span Engineering and AI, Hardware and Sensors, Data Operations, Product and Design, Go-to-Market (government sales, partnerships, customer success), and Business Operations. Tell us where you see yourself, or tell us we're missing something."
We could incorporate this as a paragraph under Qualifications or maybe as a separate section "Teams". Since we don't have a heading for Teams, maybe we can add a Teams
even though not in examples; risk but maybe acceptable. However 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 says use for section headings (e.g...). It implies we should use those headings when appropriate. If we create a heading not in that list, we might be deviating. Safer to avoid custom heading. So we can embed this paragraph under Qualifications as additional detail.
Now "What we offer" list:
"Comprehensive health, dental, and vision coverage
401(k)
for prose. We need to preserve all substantive information; do not invent or summarize away detail. Remove cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, and application instructions. We need to include a section ONLY when posting has real, specific content for it — never emit a heading followed by filler/placeholder text (e.g., "commensurate with experience", "not specified", "N/A", "varies", "TBD") and never create Pay/Schedule/Benefits sections unless posting actually states them. There's no explicit Pay or Schedule, so we should not create those sections. We need to decide which sections to include: About Us, About This Role, Who We're Looking For, Where You Might Land, Two Questions, What we offer, Our Values, Read More About Us? The "Read More About Us" seems like a list of links: "Learn about our startup journeyLearn what we are doingLearn about our customers". That's substantive? It's more like navigation; but it's content. However it might be considered boilerplate? It's not EEO. It's more like internal links. The instruction says remove cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, and application instructions. Navigation might be considered boilerplate? It says "navigation". The "Read More About Us Learn about our startup journeyLearn what we are doingLearn about our customers" seems like navigation links. Probably should remove as navigation boilerplate. Also "Together, we stay curious, learn quickly, and keep raising the bar. If you want to grow, make an impact that truly matters, and be part of a team that's shaping the future of public infrastructure, you'll feel right at home at Cyvl." That's prose, could be part of About Us? It's after the values? Actually after values there is that paragraph. It's substantive, not boilerplate. We'll keep it maybe as part of About Us or a separate section? Could be part of About Us. But we already have About Us earlier. Might duplicate. Better to keep as a separate section like "Our Culture" but not specified heading. The instruction says use headings for section headings like About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule. But we can also use other headings? It says use
for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule). It implies we should use those headings when applicable, but we can also use other headings? Probably we should stick to those headings where relevant. For "About Us" we can use About Us
. For "About This Role" we can use About the role
(they said About the role as example). But the posting says "About This Role". We'll map to About the role. For "Who We're Looking For" maybe map to Requirements or Qualifications? Could be "Requirements". But we have a list of builder types etc. That's more like qualifications. We'll use Qualifications
. For "Where You Might Land" maybe map to "Skills" or "Teams"? Not exactly. Could be "Skills"? But it's about teams. Could be "Teams". Not in list. Might be better to create a custom heading? The instruction says use those headings for section headings (e.g...). It doesn't forbid other headings, but says use for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule). Likely they expect us to use those headings when appropriate. For "Where You Might Land" maybe it's about where you could fit; could be considered "Skills"? Not really. Could be "Teams". Since not in list, maybe we should not create a section if it doesn't map? But we have substantive content. The instruction: "Prefer a few substantive sections over many thin ones." So we could combine some.
We could have sections: About Us, About the role, Qualifications, What we offer, Our Values. Also include the Two Questions as part of About the role? Or as a separate section maybe "Application Questions"? Not in list. Could be part of About the role. The Two Questions are instructions for applicants; they are application instructions, which we should remove? The instruction says remove application instructions. Indeed: "Remove cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, and application instructions." So the Two Questions are application instructions; we should remove them. So we should not include that section.
Thus we drop the Two Questions.
Now "Read More About Us" maybe navigation; remove.
Now "At Cyvl, we welcome diversity..." EEO; remove.
Now we need to preserve all substantive information: About Us paragraph, About This Role paragraph, Who We're Looking For (list of builder types), Where You Might Land (list of teams), What we offer (list of benefits), Our Values (list of values), plus the closing paragraph about curiosity etc.
We need to format lists with - . For prose, use
.
We need to decide headings.
Let's map:
- About Us:
About Us
... (the paragraph). Also maybe include the closing paragraph about curiosity etc under About Us? Could be separate but we can append.
- About the role:
About the role
... (the paragraph about "There isn't one...").
- Qualifications:
Qualifications
... (the "Who We're Looking For" paragraph). Then maybe a list of the builder types? Actually the "Who We're Looking For" includes bullet-like sentences: "Builders. You've started something...". Could be formatted as
- each.
- Where You Might Land: Could be
Teams
(though not in list). But we could treat as "Skills"? Not accurate. Maybe we can make a section "Where you might land" as a custom heading but risk violating instruction. However instruction says use for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule). It doesn't say we cannot use other headings, but gives examples. Safer to stick to those. Where you might land could be considered "Skills"? Not really. Could be "Responsibilities"? Not. Could be "Requirements"? Not. Could be "About the role"? Already used. Could be "Qualifications"? Already used. Could be "Benefits"? No. Could be "Pay"? No. Could be "Schedule"? No.
Thus maybe we should not create a separate section for Where You Might Land; we could incorporate that info into Qualifications or About the role? But it's distinct: teams where you might land. Could be included under Qualifications as additional detail. However the instruction says preserve ALL substantive information; we can embed it in a paragraph under Qualifications.
Similarly, the closing paragraph about curiosity could be part of About Us.
Thus final sections: About Us, About the role, Qualifications, What we offer, Our Values.
Now we need to format lists.
Let's extract content.
About Us paragraph:
"The best infrastructure is invisible. You only notice it when it fails. For decades, the people responsible for our roads, bridges, and sidewalks have been asked to manage the physical world with tools that can't see it. CYVL is the Physical AI company changing that. We help governments build infrastructure faster with hardware, software, and AI, turning street-level capture into living intelligence that 500+ cities and towns across the country use to see what's out there, direct the work, and fix problems before they fail. We believe in a future where infrastructure keeps up with society. Every street, sidewalk, bridge, everywhere. The proof isn't a dashboard. It's a smoother commute, a safer walk to school, public dollars going where they matter most. We're a fast-moving team in Boston building for the real world. If you believe technology's highest calling is public good, come build with us."
We'll put that in
.
About the role paragraph:
"There isn't one. That's the point. This posting is for people who are excited about Cyvl but they don't fit into anything currently open. Maybe you've built a company, and you're looking for the next hard problem. Maybe you've spent fifteen years in public works, and you know exactly why our customers do what they do. Maybe your skill set doesn't have a clean job title yet. Apply here. We read everyone. When a role opens that fits you, you're the first call. Sometimes the role doesn't exist yet, and we build it around the person."
We'll put that in
.
Qualifications: The "Who We're Looking For" section:
"Builders. You've started something. A company, a team, a product, a program inside a company that didn't want one. You're comfortable with no playbook and no permission. Operators. You make things run. You've scaled a function, fixed a broken process, or taken something from chaos to boring in the best way. Deep technical talent. Perception, LiDAR, geospatial, AI, embedded systems, data infrastructure. You've solved hard problems in the physical world, not just on a screen. Domain experts. You've worked in public works, transportation, civil engineering, or government procurement. You know how a capital plan actually gets approved and what a DPW director is up against in a council meeting."
We could format each bold label as a list item. Let's make
- Builders. You've started something. A company, a team, a product, a program inside a company that didn't want one. You're comfortable with no playbook and no permission.
etc.
We'll need to preserve the sentences exactly.
Now "Where You Might Land" content: "Our teams span Engineering and AI, Hardware and Sensors, Data Operations, Product and Design, Go-to-Market (government sales, partnerships, customer success), and Business Operations. Tell us where you see yourself, or tell us we're missing something."
We could incorporate this as a paragraph under Qualifications or maybe as a separate section "Teams". Since we don't have a heading for Teams, maybe we can add a Teams
even though not in examples; risk but maybe acceptable. However 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 says use for section headings (e.g...). It implies we should use those headings when appropriate. If we create a heading not in that list, we might be deviating. Safer to avoid custom heading. So we can embed this paragraph under Qualifications as additional detail.
Now "What we offer" list:
"Comprehensive health, dental, and vision coverage
401(k)
- . For prose, use
. We need to decide headings. Let's map: - About Us:
About Us
... (the paragraph). Also maybe include the closing paragraph about curiosity etc under About Us? Could be separate but we can append. - About the role:
About the role
... (the paragraph about "There isn't one..."). - Qualifications:
Qualifications
... (the "Who We're Looking For" paragraph). Then maybe a list of the builder types? Actually the "Who We're Looking For" includes bullet-like sentences: "Builders. You've started something...". Could be formatted as
- each.
- Where You Might Land: Could be
Teams
(though not in list). But we could treat as "Skills"? Not accurate. Maybe we can make a section "Where you might land" as a custom heading but risk violating instruction. However instruction says usefor section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule). It doesn't say we cannot use other headings, but gives examples. Safer to stick to those. Where you might land could be considered "Skills"? Not really. Could be "Responsibilities"? Not. Could be "Requirements"? Not. Could be "About the role"? Already used. Could be "Qualifications"? Already used. Could be "Benefits"? No. Could be "Pay"? No. Could be "Schedule"? No. Thus maybe we should not create a separate section for Where You Might Land; we could incorporate that info into Qualifications or About the role? But it's distinct: teams where you might land. Could be included under Qualifications as additional detail. However the instruction says preserve ALL substantive information; we can embed it in a paragraph under Qualifications. Similarly, the closing paragraph about curiosity could be part of About Us. Thus final sections: About Us, About the role, Qualifications, What we offer, Our Values. Now we need to format lists. Let's extract content. About Us paragraph: "The best infrastructure is invisible. You only notice it when it fails. For decades, the people responsible for our roads, bridges, and sidewalks have been asked to manage the physical world with tools that can't see it. CYVL is the Physical AI company changing that. We help governments build infrastructure faster with hardware, software, and AI, turning street-level capture into living intelligence that 500+ cities and towns across the country use to see what's out there, direct the work, and fix problems before they fail. We believe in a future where infrastructure keeps up with society. Every street, sidewalk, bridge, everywhere. The proof isn't a dashboard. It's a smoother commute, a safer walk to school, public dollars going where they matter most. We're a fast-moving team in Boston building for the real world. If you believe technology's highest calling is public good, come build with us." We'll put that in
. About the role paragraph: "There isn't one. That's the point. This posting is for people who are excited about Cyvl but they don't fit into anything currently open. Maybe you've built a company, and you're looking for the next hard problem. Maybe you've spent fifteen years in public works, and you know exactly why our customers do what they do. Maybe your skill set doesn't have a clean job title yet. Apply here. We read everyone. When a role opens that fits you, you're the first call. Sometimes the role doesn't exist yet, and we build it around the person." We'll put that in
. Qualifications: The "Who We're Looking For" section: "Builders. You've started something. A company, a team, a product, a program inside a company that didn't want one. You're comfortable with no playbook and no permission. Operators. You make things run. You've scaled a function, fixed a broken process, or taken something from chaos to boring in the best way. Deep technical talent. Perception, LiDAR, geospatial, AI, embedded systems, data infrastructure. You've solved hard problems in the physical world, not just on a screen. Domain experts. You've worked in public works, transportation, civil engineering, or government procurement. You know how a capital plan actually gets approved and what a DPW director is up against in a council meeting." We could format each bold label as a list item. Let's make
- Builders. You've started something. A company, a team, a product, a program inside a company that didn't want one. You're comfortable with no playbook and no permission. etc. We'll need to preserve the sentences exactly. Now "Where You Might Land" content: "Our teams span Engineering and AI, Hardware and Sensors, Data Operations, Product and Design, Go-to-Market (government sales, partnerships, customer success), and Business Operations. Tell us where you see yourself, or tell us we're missing something." We could incorporate this as a paragraph under Qualifications or maybe as a separate section "Teams". Since we don't have a heading for Teams, maybe we can add a
Teams
even though not in examples; risk but maybe acceptable. However instruction says "usefor section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule)". It doesn't forbid other headings, but says use
for section headings (e.g...). It implies we should use those headings when appropriate. If we create a heading not in that list, we might be deviating. Safer to avoid custom heading. So we can embed this paragraph under Qualifications as additional detail. Now "What we offer" list: "Comprehensive health, dental, and vision coverage 401(k)
- each.
- Where You Might Land: Could be