Free account: 5 resume reviews with AI rewrite suggestions + 10 eligible AI actions each month. See plans →
ReachRole

Guides for your first job

How your GitHubactually gets read.

A hiring manager spends under two minutes on your GitHub, in a specific order. Here is what they check, a rubric to score yourself against, and a checklist before you share the link.

  • Five-point rubricwith good vs bad examples
  • Skim orderreviewers actually use
  • Checklistbefore sharing the link

The five-point rubric

README
Good

What the project does, why, how to run it, and a screenshot or demo link — readable in under a minute.

Bad

The default "# project-name" with nothing else, or a wall of text with no structure.

Running instructions
Good

Clear setup steps that actually work if someone follows them fresh, with dependencies listed.

Bad

No setup instructions, or ones that reference files or env vars that don't exist in the repo.

Commit history
Good

A real sequence of commits over time, showing iteration — even a small number of meaningful commits.

Bad

One giant "initial commit" with the entire project dumped in at once.

Repo count vs quality
Good

One or two repos that are complete, documented and working.

Bad

Twenty repos, most empty or abandoned after one commit — this reads as scattered, not prolific.

Honesty about AI use
Good

If AI tools helped write parts of it, that's fine — being able to explain every part when asked is what matters.

Bad

Code you clearly can't explain when asked a basic question about it in an interview.

The order a reviewer actually skims in

Under two minutes, usually, in roughly this sequence.

  1. The profile README or pinned repos first — whatever you've chosen to feature is read as your own judgement of your best work.
  2. The README of your top pinned repo — if it doesn't explain the project in the first few lines, many reviewers move on.
  3. Whether the project actually runs, or at least has a live demo/screenshot — a reviewer rarely clones and runs code themselves, so a demo link or GIF does the work.
  4. The commit graph — a quick glance at whether there's real activity over time or one dump commit.
  5. A skim of the actual code in one or two files, mostly to check it's coherent and matches what the README claims.

Checklist before sharing your GitHub link

  • Does your top pinned repo have a README a stranger could follow in under a minute?
  • Does the project actually run, or is there a live demo/screenshot if it can't be easily run locally?
  • Have you unpinned or deleted (or at least hidden from the profile) empty and abandoned repos?
  • Can you explain every significant part of your top project out loud, including anything AI-assisted?
  • Is your GitHub email/username professional, and does your profile picture match your other professional profiles?
  • Have you removed or gitignored any secrets, API keys or personal data accidentally committed?

Give it somewhere to live

Build one project properly, then showcase it on a portfolio page.

Browse project ideas Build my portfolio page

Keep going

College project to resume bullets Project explanation scripts All fresher guides

QUESTIONS? WE'VE GOT ANSWERS

Common questions

Presenting your code honestly and well

Is it bad if my code used AI tools to help write it?
No — using AI assistance is now normal, and most reviewers assume some level of it. What matters is that you can explain every meaningful decision and every piece of the code when asked, since that's exactly what an interviewer will probe. Code you can't explain is the actual problem, not the AI use itself.
How many repos should I have pinned?
Two to four is usually enough — pin your strongest, most complete work rather than everything you've ever built. A reviewer looking at six pinned repos of mixed quality gets a worse impression than one looking at two excellent ones.
Should I delete old, messy repos from my early learning days?
You don't need to delete them, but unpin them and consider making them private if they don't represent your current level. There's no need to hide that you started somewhere, but your public-facing profile should lead with your best current work.
Does commit frequency matter, or just the final result?
Both, to different reviewers — the final result matters more for whether the project is impressive, but a real commit history is what makes it credible as your own iterative work rather than a copied or one-shot dump. Aim for genuine, incremental commits as you build, not a single "final version" push.
What if my best project is a team project from college — should I include it?
Yes, but be clear in the README about exactly which parts were yours, since a shared repo with no attribution makes it hard for a reviewer to know what you actually did. Being specific here also gives you something concrete to talk about in an interview.
Should I include a personal website link alongside GitHub?
If you have a portfolio site, yes — it gives a reviewer a curated, designed view of your best work alongside the raw code, and the two complement each other well.
Still have questions? We're happy to help.
Email us We usually reply within a day