Righthand
← All posts

How to use a Righthand with Breezy HR

Prepare a reviewed position-by-position candidate coordination list from approved Breezy HR inputs, with a worked brief, access checks, and reconciliation.

Quick answer

Use a scoped Breezy HR position and candidate extract to prepare an administrative coordination list. Keep each candidate tied to the intended position and preserve unresolved scheduling or ownership questions for the recruiting team.

Start with a position-by-position candidate coordination list that the recruiting desk owner can check against the original records. Righthand prepares the review artifact; the source application remains the operational record.

Establish the input route

Breezy HR’s API overview describes a subset of the website’s functionality, rather than promising that every interface action has an API equivalent. Official Breezy HR reference, checked October 6, 2026.

Have the recruiting administrator approve the position slice and relevant coordination fields. Check the available read operation and company context for a connected route. An approved extract remains sufficient for this first list; do not infer unsupported actions from the provider’s general API availability.

Check the current integration directory and Righthand setup documentation. A listed app does not establish every read or write action. For a connected route, verify the assigned account, available operation, object scope, and one permitted sample read. This guide also works from an explicitly supplied, approved extract; it does not require an unverified native operation. Keep credentials out of the article brief.

Worked input and output

These three records are synthetic illustrations, not customer results or a hands-on integration test.

Approved inputProposed review output
BR71: candidate appears under positions P1 and P2Retain two position-context rows with their own owners
BR72: interview note names a local time without timezoneFlag schedule interpretation before drafting any invitation
BR73: candidate row has no coordinator referencePrepare ownership question, without assessing the candidate

The coordination list should make ambiguity actionable: position, record, missing field, and responsible staff question. BR72 does not authorize choosing the timezone that seems likely. BR71 should not be collapsed into one row merely because the candidate display name matches.

A complete first-run brief

Use an approved Breezy HR position/candidate extract and coordination notes for October 12–16, 2026. Fields: company reference, position reference, candidate reference, recorded stage, interviewer reference, scheduled time, owner, source timestamp. At Monday 9 AM America/Los_Angeles, prepare a position-by-position candidate coordination list as source-linked Markdown in my private review thread. Preserve record identities and the extract timestamp. Group unresolved items by next action and responsible owner. Reviewer: recruiting desk owner. Do not rank applicants, move candidates, make hiring decisions, send invitations, or change position records. Result check: Check candidate/position pairs and have the coordinator verify all schedule and ownership exceptions.

A permitted preparation step does not authorize a consequential write or an external send. Resolve proposed changes through the app's supported process after the responsible owner approves their exact scope.

Reconcile before widening the task

An accessible company record does not prove access to every position. If one position’s records are unavailable, report that scope gap separately from an empty pipeline. Avoid collecting evaluation text when the coordination task only needs scheduling references and owner identities.

Trial the list before one recruiter desk handoff. Ask the coordinator to resolve BR72’s timezone from the original schedule source. Accept the list only if position scope stays visible and unresolved ownership does not become an invented assignment.

For the first acceptance review, keep the original input slice beside the result and mark which items were checked. If access or evidence is incomplete, return that gap with its record identity rather than a confident completion statement. Review Pricing using the actual preparation workload and correction effort.