LinkedIn
Decision-gated
LinkedIn engineering guide

Design Recruiter search around job purpose and candidate rights

A recruiting-specific guide to entitlement, requisition scope, explainable criteria, candidate-data minimization, review, retention, and human hiring authority.

Educational research only. LinkedIn account access remains decision-gated. No DewEngine LinkedIn connector is approved or implemented.
01
Separate product

Recruiter access needs its own entitlement contract

Recruiter search, projects, talent pools, candidate pipelines, job postings, applicants, resumes, and messaging carry product-specific and candidate-data obligations. DewEngine has no approved Recruiter connector. The platform blueprint keeps it decision-gated until the LinkedIn gate clears, the exact Recruiter subscription is validated, and purpose limitation, retention, deletion, and per-feature entitlement tests pass.

  • Do not infer Recruiter access from a base LinkedIn account
  • Keep candidate capabilities distinct from sales features
02
Job purpose

Bind every search to a requisition or documented need

A search definition should identify the hiring organization, recruiter, role, location, required skills, allowed criteria, retention window, and review owner. Open-ended talent collection creates a shadow database without a clear purpose. When the requisition closes or changes materially, stop scheduled search and re-evaluate retained candidates rather than continuing an evergreen pipeline by default.

  • Version search criteria with the requisition
  • Expire unreviewed candidate observations on schedule
03
Criteria safety

Keep matching explainable and job-related

Search and ranking should use explicit, reviewable job criteria and avoid inferred protected or sensitive traits. Missing profile fields are not negative evidence. Provider order must not become an automatic hiring score. Show recruiters why a candidate appeared, which evidence is uncertain, and how to correct a mistaken identity or company association before any outreach or stage change.

  • Require human review before candidate advancement
  • Audit filters and derived features for proxy discrimination
04
ATS boundary

Keep application and hiring decisions in the ATS

The ATS remains authoritative for candidate identity, application, stage, interview, accommodation, recruiter role, and disposition. A connector returns source-scoped observations and communication evidence using opaque references. It must not auto-reject, advance, or merge applicants. A searched professional and an applicant may be the same person, but that association needs tenant-local evidence and correction.

  • Never expose one employer's candidate mapping to another
  • Separate sourcing interest from applicant consent and status
05
Communication

Treat contact as a later accountable decision

A shortlisted search result does not authorize an InMail, invitation, or message. Before contact, verify recruiter authority, current job purpose, recipient identity, prior preference, suppression, existing conversation, account entitlement, budget, and final content approval. A response should pause incompatible follow-ups and route to the recruiter; automated classification cannot make the hiring decision.

  • Show the job and sender beside every proposed message
  • Record candidate preference and withdrawal across workflows
06
Release evidence

Qualify candidate lifecycle and adverse failure

Tests must cover subscription eligibility, role changes, closed requisitions, duplicate candidates, withdrawn applications, inaccessible profiles, unsupported filters, partial pages, throttling, tenant substitution, correction, export, retention, erasure, and account restriction. Counsel and provider approval, consented real-account conformance, audit, conservative budgets, and kill switches are mandatory. Until then, this remains educational recruiting architecture.

  • Test deletion across search, project, message, and ATS links
  • Review what candidates see when data or outreach is wrong
Questions

Before you build.

Can Recruiter search results automatically create ATS applicants?+

They should not. A sourced professional is not necessarily an applicant, and identity may be uncertain. Create a reviewable sourcing candidate with provenance, then let the ATS and accountable recruiter govern any application or stage.

Does profile completeness justify ranking a candidate lower?+

No. Missing data may reflect privacy, entitlement, or presentation choices rather than job fit. Use explicit job-related evidence, preserve unknown states, and keep advancement decisions with accountable humans.

Build with us

Does this match the workflow your users need?

DewEngine is in development. Real use cases decide what ships first.

Share your use case