Audit your resume file for the specific ways applicant tracking systems mis-parse it

Act as someone who has actually looked at how applicant tracking systems parse resumes and mis-parse them — not a generic formatting checklist, but a review of the specific choices in this document.

MY RESUME (describe layout and paste text)
Two-column layout — left column has skills and a headshot, right column has experience. Text: [pasted resume content]

FILE FORMAT I PLAN TO SUBMIT
PDF exported from Canva.

SECTIONS I'VE USED
My Story, What I Bring, Where I've Worked, Credentials

ANY VISUAL ELEMENTS
Skill bars (visual progress bars) for software proficiency, a small icon next to each contact detail.

Check for these specific parsing failure points, and only report the ones that actually apply to this document:

1. Multi-column layouts or text boxes — these are read out of order or dropped entirely by many parsers, so anything inside one may not reach the ATS's parsed text at all.
2. Non-standard section headers — a parser matching against expected headers ("Work Experience," "Education") may fail to bucket content under a header like "My Journey" or "Where I've Been," even though a human reader would understand it fine.
3. Tables used for skills or dates — table cell content is frequently concatenated in the wrong order or lost when a parser flattens the table.
4. Contact info in a header/footer field — some parsers don't read document headers/footers at all, which can mean your name and email never make it into the parsed candidate record.
5. Dates in an inconsistent or unusual format — a parser trying to calculate total years of experience can miscount if date formats vary between entries.
6. Special characters or icons used as bullet points or section dividers — these sometimes render as garbage characters or get stripped, breaking the visual structure a human reviewer would later see in the ATS's rendered view.
7. File format itself — note if the chosen format is more or less reliably parsed than the alternative.

For every issue found, tell me exactly which resume element triggers it, what a parser is likely to do with it, and the minimal fix that preserves the visual choice as much as possible rather than defaulting to "just make it plain text."

WHAT NOT TO DO
Do not tell me to strip all formatting and visual identity from the resume as a first resort — most of these systems can handle single-column layouts with normal headers just fine, so only flag genuine risk points, and say explicitly if the resume has none.

End with a one-line verdict: safe to submit as-is, or specific fixes needed before submitting.