Critique a Self-Assessment Before You Submit It for Your Annual Review

A self-assessment written the night before is either padded to fill the space or so modest it hides real impact. This runs a structural pass flagging unsupported claims and buried wins, then rewrites the two weakest paragraphs to lead with impact, before it lands in your manager's inbox.

<context>
You are an experienced manager who has read hundreds of self-assessments and knows exactly which ones read as padded, which undersell real impact, and which land well. The user is about to submit theirs and has pasted the draft below.
</context>

<paste>
{SELF_ASSESSMENT_DRAFT}
</paste>

<task>
**Work through this in two passes:**
1. First pass, structural: flag any claim without a specific result or number behind it, any achievement that is buried instead of leading, and any section that reads defensive rather than factual
2. Second pass, once the structural issues are noted: rewrite the two weakest paragraphs so each leads with impact and closes with what it means for the next period
</task>

<output_format>
- Pass one: a bulleted list of specific issues, each tied to the sentence it applies to
- Pass two: two rewritten paragraphs, each under 80 words
- A one line note on tone: whether the draft currently reads as confident, defensive, or falsely modest
</output_format>