Talent SummonerWhat Should a Candidate Sourcing Agent Return?
A practical output contract for candidate sourcing agents: shortlist, evidence, uncertainty, source trace, feedback, sharing and next action.
A candidate sourcing agent should return more than a list of names. It should hand a hiring team a reviewable research packet: who merits attention first, what supports that priority, what remains unknown, where each signal came from, and what to do next.
That output contract keeps discovery separate from selection. A shortlist is an investigation queue, not a promise that the people at the top are complete matches, objectively ranked, or likely to be hired. The team still verifies claims, chooses outreach, runs interviews and makes the employment decision.
The output contract at a glance
| Output | What it should contain | Review question |
|---|---|---|
| Shortlist | Ordered candidates and the role criteria used | Why is this person in this position? |
| Evidence | Supporting profile, project or career signals | What visible fact supports each relevant requirement? |
| Uncertainty | Unknown, adjacent or conflicting information | What should a human verify? |
| Source trace | Source name, link, date and search context | Can a reviewer retrace the signal? |
| Feedback | Corrections, preferences and false-positive notes | What should change in the next search? |
| Shareability | A readable report with context and permissions | Can another decision-maker review it without a call? |
| Next action | A named owner and disposition | Is the next step verify, progress, hold or close? |
1. A shortlist that explains priority
The shortlist should be ordered for attention, not presented as a verdict. Put the role brief beside each candidate: must-haves, nice-to-haves, boundaries and approved adjacent backgrounds. For each result, explain in plain English what visible work, scope or context made it worth reviewing. State the search scope so nobody mistakes it for a complete market census.
2. Evidence attached to each requirement
Evidence should be requirement-by-requirement. Show which public signal supports a must-have, which is adjacent and which preference is present. Separate a title from the work behind it and a technology keyword from a project using it. Reviewers should be able to inspect the source; if a profile says "led migration" but omits scale, record the claim and missing context rather than inventing a number.
3. Uncertainty made visible
Every result needs an uncertainty field. Useful labels include supported, adjacent, unknown and contradicted. Unknown means the public material did not establish a fact; contradicted means it conflicts with an agreed requirement. Missing information is not automatically negative, so add a verification question for material unknowns. Do not hide uncertainty inside a score or describe a score as a probability of job performance.
4. A source trace a colleague can follow
Source trace turns a result into an auditable hand-off. Record the source name, direct URL where appropriate, date checked and the profile section supporting the explanation. Note the search or role-brief context too. Distinguish public evidence from interpretation, never imply access to private information, and verify material details before outreach because public information can be incomplete or stale.
5. Feedback that changes the next pass
Feedback is part of the output, not an afterthought. Let reviewers mark false positives, useful adjacent backgrounds, missing evidence and over-weighted criteria. Capture corrections in the brief's language, such as "treat payments infrastructure as relevant adjacent experience" rather than "show fewer like this". Change one important input at a time, record the approved change and compare the next search without pretending it is automatically accurate.
6. Shareability with enough context
A shareable report should stand alone. Include the role brief version, search date, criteria, explanations, uncertainty, sources and reviewer notes. Send the smallest useful report to people who need it, avoid sensitive or speculative details, and let recipients add a disposition or question without changing the original evidence.
7. A named next action
End every candidate record with a disposition and owner. Progress means the evidence merits a human conversation; verify means an important question remains; hold means timing or a second opinion is needed; close means the profile conflicts with an approved requirement. These are workflow states, not predictions. The report should say whether to verify a small set, revise the brief, run another search or hand the shortlist to the hiring manager.
Where Talent Summoner fits
Talent Summoner is our product. Its candidate sourcing page, checked 19 August 2026, says a role brief is searched across LinkedIn, GitHub and other public sources across 200M+ profiles, returning a ranked shortlist with must-haves, nice-to-haves and plain-English reasoning. It also describes feedback-driven sourcing; use the contract above to review evidence, uncertainty and source trace.
For an existing CV pool, the candidate-ranking tool accepts up to 50 PDF, DOCX, MD or TXT files and creates a shareable report, according to the live page checked the same date. Sourcing starts free without a credit card. The pricing page currently lists US$39 for one Role, US$99 for three Roles and US$79 per month for four Roles; pack Roles remain valid for 24 months and monthly Roles roll for three months. Recheck terms before purchase.
Talent Summoner is a sourcing and ranking product, not an ATS. Your team owns verification, outreach, interviews, accommodations, selection and communication.
Bottom line
Specify the output before judging the agent: shortlist, evidence, uncertainty, source trace, feedback, shareability and next action. That contract makes a sourcing result useful even when the available information is incomplete. Start with a candidate sourcing brief, then ask the role owner to inspect the evidence and assign the next action.
FAQ
Should a sourcing agent return a score?
It may return an ordering or fit explanation, but a score should not be treated as proof of accuracy, fairness or job performance. The useful output is the evidence and uncertainty behind the priority.
What is source trace in candidate sourcing?
Source trace records where a signal came from, when it was checked and how it relates to the role brief. It lets another reviewer retrace the reasoning and identify stale or incomplete information.
How should feedback affect a new search?
Feedback should identify a concrete correction, such as an over-weighted title, a missed adjacent background or an unclear must-have. Apply the approved change, record it and compare the next result set with the previous one.
Can a shortlist be shared with a hiring manager?
Yes, if the report includes the criteria, reasoning, uncertainty, sources and a way to record the next action. Talent Summoner's candidate-ranking report supports shareable reports; limit access to the people who need the information.
Does a candidate sourcing agent replace the hiring decision?
No. It can organise discovery and prioritise review. Humans verify material claims, decide whether to contact someone, conduct the assessment and make the hiring decision.
Related: Talent Sourcing Strategy for a First Technical Hire · How to Source Candidates When Job Titles Mislead · Passive Candidate Sourcing Without Mass Outreach: A Practical Guide
Talent Summoner product facts read from our live candidate sourcing, candidate ranking and pricing pages, verified 19 August 2026. We re-verify this page quarterly — tell us if something changed.
