We’re recruiting Finance professionals (financial planners, investment advisors/consultants, and bank relationship managers) to review and improve realistic financial scenarios used to train AI financial assistants.
Your job isn’t to “pick the best asset.” It’s to think like a real advisor and spot what makes a client situation real, high-stakes, and action-changing — then upgrade weak scenarios so they actually test the model.
‼️ AI is not allowed. If we spot AI use, we’ll block the application.
⚠️ This application form must be completed entirely in English.
🚨 READ ALL THE DESCRIPTION BELOW TO UNDERSTAND THE APPLICATION FORM.
WHO CAN APPLY
- Bank relationship managers
- Financial planners
- Investment advisors / consultants
- 3+ years of professional experience
- English level: Upper Intermediate / Advanced (required)
WHAT YOU’LL DO IN THE APPLICATION (QUICK SCREENING TEST)
You will review two pre-generated finance tasks. For each task, you’ll answer simple 1–5 ratings and give a short justification.
Then, for the 2nd task, you’ll rewrite it to make it stronger.
WHAT “STRONG” MEANS (SIMPLE DEFINITION)
A strong task includes one decisive constraint that can make “reasonable” advice materially wrong or harmful if overlooked.
We call this a Knife:
- A Knife is a constraint that changes the correct strategy.
- Quick test: if you remove it, the best recommendation would meaningfully change.
Examples of Knives in Finance:
- High-interest debt APR / terms
- Liquidity lockups or withdrawal penalties
- Concentration risk (single stock, employer stock)
- Tax residency / account eligibility constraints
- Risk-of-ruin (thin emergency fund, income instability)
- Compliance boundary (no illegal evasion, no guaranteed returns)
WHAT YOU WILL RATE (1–5) IN THE FORM
You’ll give 3 ratings per task:
- Overall Quality (1–5)
How clear and testable the task is (can you judge PASS/FAIL)? - Knife / Hidden Context Strength (1–5)
Is there a decisive constraint that flips the strategy — or is the “hidden context” just background that doesn’t change the recommendation? - Checklist Quality (1–5)
Does the checklist truly test strategy quality under constraints, with clear criteria?
(Strong checklists focus on constraint adherence + sequencing + risk framing + safety/compliance, written as PASS/FAIL — not “ask questions.”)
You’ll also write a short justification (2–4 bullets) explaining your ratings.
WHAT YOU WILL REWRITE (FOR THE 2ND TASK ONLY)
You will rewrite these parts to make the task stronger:
-
Scenario (3rd person) — more realistic + naturally sets up the decision pressure
-
Prompt (user message) — natural, human, does not reveal the Knife
-
Hidden Context (1–3 bullets) — must include exactly 1 decisive Knife
-
Checklist (4–6 items) — each item must be PASS/FAIL, covering:
- constraint adherence (explicitly incorporates the Knife)
- expert move (sequencing/phasing, liquidity preservation, ruin-risk prevention, prioritization)
- risk framing (tradeoffs/uncertainty; no guarantees)
- safety/compliance boundary when relevant
Checklist item example:
PASS if it prioritizes high-APR debt (or states assumptions and branches); FAIL if it recommends investing-first without addressing the Knife.
Important: Don’t “leak” the Knife in the prompt (no “IMPORTANT”, no all-caps, no “the key detail is…”).
IF SELECTED (PROJECT WORK)
You’ll review batches of pre-generated finance scenarios:
- Rating realism and decision risk
- Identifying weak or missing constraints (Knives)
- Improving tasks so they better represent real moments where “reasonable” advice becomes harmful
COMPENSATION
If selected, you will be invited to review 5 real tasks as part of the project.
(Compensation details will be provided upon selection.)
WHAT WE’RE LOOKING FOR
- You can recognize what’s realistic vs. generic in client situations
- You understand what truly changes the recommendation (APR, liquidity, taxes/eligibility, ruin risk, concentration)
- You can upgrade a “fine” scenario into a strong test without making it artificial