Hiring guide / Metix AI field notes
Passive candidate email template: write from evidence
Explain why the opening is relevant without inventing interest or fit. Use the editable worksheet to check the message before you approve it.
The short version
Identify yourself, name the approved role and its constraints, refer to professional work you can verify, and ask whether details would be useful. Keep unknown interest and qualifications out of the message. The downloads include blank inputs and an illustrative rewrite.
Can you support the sentence?
Gather the facts
Keep the role brief and the relevant professional source together.
Review the draft
Remove assumptions about intent, benefits and complete fit.
Own the reply
Answer material questions and record the next action or stop request.
The worked examples are invented teaching cases. They were not sent and do not establish a reply rate.
Metix AI publishes this guide and sells recruiting software. Sources and product scope checked October 22, 2026. The worked examples are editorial illustrations, not messages sent to real candidates or measured results.
A passive candidate email template you can adapt
A passive candidate email introduces a real opening to someone who has not applied. Identify yourself, explain the relevant work you noticed, give enough role detail to assess the opportunity and ask whether they want more information.
Recruiters often use passive to mean someone who is not actively job hunting. A profile does not establish that state. This guide concerns an employer writing to a sourced person who has not applied to the role; it does not assume their employment status or interest.
Subject: [Role] at [company], [location or work model]
Hi [name],
I'm [sender], recruiting for [company]. I read [specific professional work] and noticed [one relevant detail you can support].
We're hiring a [role] to work on [approved responsibility]. The role is [material location/work constraint]. Would it be useful if I sent the role brief?
[Sender's name, role, employer and verifiable contact details]
Replace every bracket and obtain the hiring team's approval before sending the message. If you cannot support the observation or explain why it matters to this role, use a simpler introduction. Avoid turning a keyword match into a claim that someone is a perfect fit.
Download the editable templates and worked revision (Markdown) or the claim worksheet (CSV). Both work in your own editor. In the CSV, R and P rows supply the invented role and professional evidence; T1-T4 show the four rejected claims. Fill B1-B9 with your own inputs and keep the actual source URLs in your private recruiting records.
Prepare the facts before personalizing
Keep the approved hiring brief beside the candidate's relevant professional source. The brief establishes what your team can offer. The source establishes what you actually observed about the person.
A sentence such as "your incident review separates temporary failures from permanent ones" points to work the recipient can recognize. "You would love our startup" guesses at motivation. Public work cannot tell you whether someone is considering a move.
| Input | What to record | What to leave open |
|---|---|---|
| Role | Approved work, hiring owner and material constraints | Benefits or flexibility the owner has not agreed to |
| Professional evidence | Source URL, observation date and the specific contribution | Responsibility or experience the source does not establish |
| Relationship | A real prior conversation or referral | Implied familiarity, endorsement or interest |
| Next step | A clear question and someone who will read the reply | A meeting or candidate qualification that has not happened |
Workable's recruiter email guide recommends adapting templates to the situation and explaining the reason for contact. Use the worksheet to make that explanation specific. Save the exact source behind a claim rather than relying on a remembered profile snippet.
Revise a message against its evidence
Consider an illustrative backend engineer opening focused on ingestion reliability. The approved work model is two office days a week in Boston. A fictional candidate's public note distinguishes retryable timeouts from permanent failures. Compensation and the person's interest are unknown. These are invented teaching inputs, not a customer case.
A rushed draft might say:
You must be ready for a new challenge. You're a perfect fit for our fully remote team, and we can offer you higher pay. Book a call with me tomorrow.
Four claims need correction. The writer has no evidence of job-search intent, complete fit or a pay increase. The remote claim contradicts the role's Boston requirement.
A revision can say:
Subject: Backend role focused on ingestion reliability
Hi Alex,
I'm [sender], recruiting for [company]. Your note on retry handling caught my attention, especially the distinction between timeouts and failures that should not be retried.
We're hiring a backend engineer to work on ingestion reliability. The role involves two office days a week in Boston. I don't know whether you're considering a move; would it be useful if I sent the role brief?
[Sender's name, role, employer and verifiable contact details]
The Boston requirement now appears before the meeting request. A recipient who needs fully remote work can decide that this opening is unsuitable without spending time on a call. The work sample still does not prove the person meets the hiring bar. Keep the other requirements in the candidate review, including evidence the work sample does not provide.
When you have no useful work sample
You do not need to invent a personal connection. If a professional profile shows relevant experience, name that limited reason for contact and explain the opening.
Hi [name],
I'm [sender], hiring for [role] at [company]. Your public profile lists [specific relevant experience, with its actual date/context]. The role involves [approved work] and [material location/work constraint].
I haven't established your fit or availability. Would you like the role details?
[Signature]
If the profile is too vague to support even that statement, return to your search or request a technical review. In the GitHub evidence workflow, a relevant project is a starting point for review, not automatic proof of its contributor's skills. Apply that limit when describing the work in a message.
Make a follow-up useful
A follow-up should add something the recipient can evaluate. It might answer a role question or share an approved team description. Repeating the same meeting request gives them no new reason to decide.
Hi [name],
One detail I can add about [role]: [new, approved information that could affect the decision]. Here's [a useful public role/team link].
If you'd like the brief, reply here. If this isn't relevant, I'll close this outreach after this note.
[Signature]
This is an optional writing example, not a proven cadence. Decide timing and a follow-up limit with your hiring owner. If the person has already asked a question, answer it rather than sending another sequence step. Honor a request to stop.
Gem's cold recruiting email article discusses message structure and reports vendor reply-rate figures. Those figures do not establish an expected result for this worksheet, your role or Metix. Review the actual conversations that follow your own approved messages.
Name the person who will answer
A reply asking about remote work is a question to resolve. It is not a qualified candidate or a booked interview. Keep a small log of what the person asked, the current answer, who owns it and the next action.
| Reply or state | Action |
|---|---|
| "Send me the details" | Send the approved brief and answer questions before asking for a meeting. |
| "Is this remote?" | Give the actual work model. Do not promise an exception. |
| "What is the compensation range?" | Send the approved range and terms. If you do not have them, obtain an answer from the hiring owner before pushing for a meeting. |
| "Please don't contact me" | Stop outreach and honor the preference in your team's records. |
| No reply | Keep interest unknown and follow the limit you chose. |
For an unanswered compensation question, a useful response is: "I don't have an approved range to share yet. I'll check with the hiring owner and come back with the details." Assign that task before moving on. This example commits you to obtaining an answer; it does not invent one.
The active sourcing guide explains the wider ownership problem. Keep the hiring owner available for questions the recruiter cannot answer.
Use the template with your own role
For occasional outreach, a manual message and a named reply owner may be enough. Metix is relevant when a real opening needs the continuing workflow from sourcing through interview booking.
According to the current Metix workflow, you define the role, review evidence and approve outreach. Mira handles sourcing, interest screening and booking. Your team conducts interviews and makes hiring decisions. Self-serve has no Metix staff shortlist review; staff-run Delivery is separately quoted.
Bring the actual role and its constraints into the product. Use your observations to review the proposed message before approving it. Check that the role is created and the outreach is approved. As the work proceeds, distinguish a reply from confirmed interest and a booking from an interview that actually took place. Your team still makes the hire.
Start with an approved opening
Define the work, inspect the supporting evidence and approve each outreach message before it sends.
What should a passive candidate email include?
Identify the sender and employer, describe the real opening and material constraints, explain a relevant professional observation you can support, and ask whether role details would be useful. A public profile does not establish job-search interest or complete fit.
How can I personalize a recruiting email without guessing?
Keep the actual professional source URL and observation date. Describe the work it supports and its limits. Remove assumptions about motivation, current compensation, availability or qualifications that the source does not establish.
How many follow-up emails should I send a passive candidate?
There is no universal count established by this guide. Choose a limit with the hiring owner and existing contact preferences. Add useful approved information, answer pending questions and honor a request to stop. The optional example is not a proven cadence or a Metix performance claim.
Do I need recruiting software to use these templates?
No. The Markdown and CSV work in your own editor. A manual message and reply owner may be enough for occasional contact. Metix is relevant for a real role needing sourcing through approved outreach and interview booking; self-serve has no staff shortlist review, and staffed Delivery is separately quoted.