\+1 for Jonathan's suggestions!

Another thing I do when I write code is think about how *future* versions of this code could potentially look like. For example, if I'm implementing a new feature that may be extended or modified in the future, how easy would it be for that new change to be made? How could these potential future changes affect the rest of the system (in terms of backwards compatability, performance, readability, etc)? The answer to these questions not only give a lot of information in how my code should be structured, but they can also guide your solution to be as future-proof as possible.

Also, as a general tip, I structure most of my PRs to have these sections:

- **Context** - includes description of the problem, solution, and alternative solutions considered
- **Description of Changes** - a summary of the actual code changes made in the PR
- **Before/After Screenshots** (if applicable)
- **Test Plan** - unit tests, integration tests, manual testing, etc

Explicitly writing these out in a PR description helps make sure I - and everyone reviewing my code - clearly understands the context and thought process behind the code changes.

Mid/Senior Software Engineer

Melissa

It's impossible to pinpoint exactly what to focus on without seeing your resume or knowing where you've applied to, but here are some general things to consider:

- How long have you been applying to jobs? It's not unusual for recruiters to take a month or two to get back to candidates (it's happened to me quite a few times), so if you're only a month or so into your search, have patience.

- Do the skills and YOE listed in the job posting align with the skills and experience listed on your resume? You don't have to match every requirement they list, but I'd reckon an ideal candidate would at least have solid evidence of the most important requirements (usually listed first).

- How well does your resume portray your skills and accomplishments? Have you had peers review your resume and given feedback? You may find tools like [ResumeWorded](https://resumeworded.com/) helpful in improving the structure and word-smithing of your resume (at least, I found it immensely helpful!).

- How large/well-known are the companies you're applying for? Smaller/lesser known companies may have fewer applicants, and you might have a better chance at standing out.

- Cold applying to companies (especially through overly-saturated networks like LinkedIn Jobs) doesn't work nearly as well as it used to. Lean into your network. Ask for referrals, and offer others a good word too.

You say that **you** find a need to explain yourself in detail, and that may be root of the issue. It's not about your needs, it's about the needs of the person asking you the question. Imagine yourself in the other person's shoes, and tailor your message to that audience. The succinctness will naturally follow.

I'm in a similar situation. I'm actively looking looking for full-stack roles, even though most of my professional experience has been backend-heavy. Here's what has been helpful to me:

- Although there are many positions that are strict about a particular stack, there are a surprising number of companies that are more interested in your problem-solving skills and general coding ability, knowing that if you do well in these interviews, you'll probably pick up their tech stack pretty quickly. I'm not sure how many companies you've talked to, but I promise there are a lot of them out there.
- Referrals, referrals, referrals! Networking has always been important in the job search, but if someone you know personally vouches for you, it'll help get your foot in the door much easier even if the tech stacks don't exactly align.
- Slightly controversial, but I'd highly recommend making a Summary section in your resume to make it clear what you're looking for. Normally this isn't necessary if you're looking to do more of what you've already done in the past, but it's essential if your prior experience doesn't reflect what you want in your next role. Just make sure you state what you're looking for, and have examples (likely through personal projects) to back it up.

All that being said, the tech job landscape right now is ROUGH, regardless of how long you've been in the field or what your specialty is (if any). The truth of the matter is, in the current market there are way *fewer* available jobs, and a lot *more* qualified candidates (thanks to layoffs). The competition is just way harder now than it used to be.

Although there are some things you can control in this situation (like providing clarity of what you're looking for in your resume, getting referrals instead of cold applying online, etc), a lot of the rejection that you (and me, and everyone else looking for a job in tech right now) are experiencing is a result of unfortunate market forces that are out of our control. And that really, *really* sucks.

Basically, although it's essential to have an idea of what you're looking for in your next job, know that things will be hard for a while, regardless of whether you have a specialty (well, unless it's super niche). Hope this helps, and best of luck in your job search!

First off, it's perfectly ok and normal to be a software engineer just because it pays the bills and you're good at it, not necessarily because you're passionate about it. It's the classic question of "work to live" or "live to work" - both are valid ways to live your life.

Are you software engineer because you genuinely love programming and solving complex problems that change the world? That's awesome! Are you a software engineer because it pays well and you need to support your family, or you want to retire early to escape the corporate rat race? That's also awesome! There are plenty of people who fall in either one of those camps, and neither path is "better" or "worse" than the other. You just need to know your why, and fully accept it.

> I don't have what it takes to be an outstanding engineer in the tech industry.

No matter what, there will always be someone who is smarter and/or more experienced than you. Even if you're an L7 at FAANG. In tech, there's this collective hyper-competitive mindset that you have to be the best in your field to be "successful" (whatever that means), but really... you don't. Yes, there is a level of corporate pressure to go from L3-&gt;L4-&gt;L5 (that's a discussion for another time). But at a certain point, it's okay to just be good enough. And perhaps what you think is "average" really is "good enough". This relates to my previous point on understanding your "why", and owning it.

> I was able to get jobs at Pinterest and the company that used to be called Meta because I memorized coding interview questions and exaggerated my achievements.

This is more a testament to how broken the interview process is at most tech companies than you as a person. Let's be honest, many people (I would even speculate most) have done the same exact thing. People tend to underestimate that there is a HUGE amount of luck involved in interviewing, and interviewing in itself is a skill that's separate from the job itself.