ATS Myths Worth Killing
Does your resume actually pass the robot test? Stop guessing about "hidden scores" and see exactly what the ATS sees.
The Reality Check Tool
Upload your resume to see how an ATS parses it.
Text Extraction
See the raw text as the machine sees it.
Format Validation
Check if your PDF or DOCX structure remains intact.
Line Break Preservation
Verify that your bullet points and headers don't get scrambled.
Drop your resume here
Supports PDF and DOCX formats (Max 5MB)
12 Common Myths vs. Reality
Recruiting technology is plumbing, not magic. Here is the truth about how it actually works.
Most ATS systems are not grading resumes. They are storing and indexing text. There is no universal hidden score. Recruiters search, filter, and skim. The system just retrieves what matches their query.
People obsess over optimization instead of clarity and fit.
There is nothing to beat. An ATS is not an adversary. It is plumbing. If your text extracts cleanly, the system does its job and gets out of the way.
Stuffing keywords does not help if the resume already parses cleanly. Most ATS searches are: titles, locations, required skills, years of experience. Keyword spam just makes resumes harder for humans to read.
No system magically repairs broken text. If extraction is scrambled, missing, or out of order, downstream parsing fails too. Better software does not undo layout mistakes.
This is the single most important truth your tool reinforces.
Bad PDFs are bad. Clean, text-based PDFs are fine. What breaks parsing: scans, multi-column layouts, tables and text boxes, icon fonts used as bullets. The format is not the issue. The layout is.
DOCX is more forgiving, but it’s not immune to problems. If Mammoth can read the DOCX cleanly, an ATS usually can too. If not, the same issues apply.
Most resumes are not rejected by software. They are filtered, ignored, or never surfaced in a recruiter’s search. Silence usually means: too many applicants, unclear fit, timing, role already effectively filled. Blaming the ATS is comforting but inaccurate.
“Experience” vs “Work History” is not the deciding factor. Parsing fails due to structure and order, not header vocabulary.
ATS systems do not care how many pages your resume has. Recruiters do. And even then, clarity matters more than length.
They don’t understand. They extract text and apply rules. That’s why showing extracted text is more useful than pretending there’s intelligence involved.
Standing out happens after parsing, not during it. Clean extraction gets you into the database. Being relevant gets you contacted.
Most parsing failures are mechanical and fixable in minutes. They say nothing about your ability, experience, or value.
Frequently Asked Questions
If the extracted text is readable to you, most ATS systems can read it too.