Who's Applying for the Job?

As a new grad looking for jobs, I have gotten used to the job application routine: find a position, read the description, adjust my resume, fill out another application, and wait.

It is repetitive, time-consuming, and often feels like a numbers game. The more jobs I apply to, the better my chances seem to be.

AI is already changing this. Job seekers can use AI to find openings, improve resumes, write cover letters, and prepare for interviews. Companies are using AI to screen candidates, find talent, schedule interviews, and communicate with applicants.

Now, vertical AI agents are starting to take this a step further. Instead of simply helping with parts of the hiring process, agents can take on larger parts of the process themselves. And that creates an interesting possibility:

What happens when both the job seeker and the company have an AI agent working for them?

01 / The Candidate Gets an Agent

The agent no longer just helps — it moves the application forward

The job search is full of small tasks that take up a lot of time. Searching through job boards. Comparing job descriptions. Figuring out whether I meet the requirements. Changing my resume. Filling out applications. Tracking where I applied. Following up.

A vertical career agent could handle much of this work. It could search for jobs based on my skills and goals, decide which ones are worth pursuing, help tailor my application, submit it, and keep track of what happens next. This is already starting to happen.

For example, AI job-search tools are being built to search for roles, tailor applications, submit them, and track responses. On the company side, platforms such as Eightfold are building agents that can engage with candidates and help move them through the hiring process.

That could make the job search much less manual for new grads. But it also creates a problem.

02 / More Applications Don't Mean Better Hiring

Everyone becomes more efficient — the hiring does not

If agents make it easier to apply for jobs, people can apply to far more positions. That sounds good for job seekers but companies still have to deal with all those applications.

Eightfold reports that LinkedIn receives around 11,000 applications every minute and that application volume has increased by more than 45% year over year, with AI-assisted applications contributing to the growth.

So companies use AI too. Recruiting agents can search for candidates, screen applications, schedule interviews, and handle other parts of the hiring process. Phenom and ServiceNow, for example, are developing agents that work across recruiting workflows.

This creates a cycle.

Everyone becomes more efficient, but the hiring process does not necessarily become better. If anything, we could end up with more applications, more screening, and more automated rejection.

The real opportunity for vertical AI agents is not simply to make both sides faster. It is to make the match better.

03 / The Resume May Stop Being the Main Thing

The resume is built for humans

This is where hiring could change in a more interesting way.

The resume is built for humans. I take years of education, projects, internships, and skills and try to fit them into one or two pages. Then someone at a company has to look at that document and figure out whether I might be a good fit.

But an agent can work with much more information. A career agent could understand my projects, skills, experience, preferences, and goals. A company's recruiting agent could understand what a team actually needs. Instead of matching a resume to a job description, the two agents could compare a much richer picture of the candidate and the role.

That could make the traditional resume less important over time. It does not mean resumes disappear. They are still useful for humans. But the resume may become more like a summary of a candidate rather than the main way companies decide whether someone is worth talking to. And that raises a bigger question:

If agents can represent candidates, what does it mean to apply for a job?

04 / Hiring Could Become Agent-to-Agent

Humans step in only where judgment is needed

A candidate agent could find an opportunity and determine that it is a strong match. A company agent could evaluate the candidate, answer basic questions, and decide whether the person should move forward. Only after that would the humans need to get involved.

This doesn't mean the agents make the final hiring decision. In fact, I think the opposite could be more valuable. Agents could handle the parts of recruiting that are repetitive and predictable. Humans could spend more time on the parts that are harder to automate: understanding potential, evaluating judgment, building relationships, and deciding whether someone would actually be a good fit for the team.

05 / The Problem With Agent-to-Agent Hiring

A game between two systems

There is also a new problem that comes with this model. If candidates and companies both have agents, both sides will try to optimize for the other side's system.

Candidates could build agents that figure out how to get through company screening systems. Companies could build agents that figure out how to filter through huge numbers of AI-generated applications. That creates a risk that the hiring process becomes a game between two systems rather than a way for people to find good opportunities.

There is also the question of fairness.

If a company's recruiting agent learns from past hiring decisions, it could repeat the same patterns and biases found in those decisions. If a candidate's agent learns how to maximize interview chances, it could optimize for what gets selected rather than what actually makes someone good at the job.

The more responsibility we give these agents, the more important it becomes to know what they are optimizing for.

06 / The Job Application Could Look Very Different

Rethinking hiring, not just automating it

As a new grad, I would obviously like to spend less time filling out job applications. But the bigger change may be what happens to the hiring process itself.

Vertical AI agents could take over many of the repetitive steps on both sides. A career agent could search and apply for jobs, while a recruiting agent could find and screen candidates. Instead of spending most of their time on forms, emails, and scheduling, people could spend more time on the parts of hiring that actually require human judgment.

There is still a risk that we simply automate the problems that already exist. If agents help candidates send more applications while companies use agents to reject them faster, the process has become more efficient without becoming much better.

The real opportunity is to use these agents to rethink how hiring works. For new grads, that could mean spending less time trying to get through the application process. For companies, it could mean spending less time sorting through applications and more time talking to strong candidates.