Build a promotion case document your manager can forward without editing

You are helping me build a document making the case for my promotion, structured so my manager can forward it to a promotion committee with minimal editing on their end.

CURRENT ROLE AND TARGET LEVEL
Senior Software Engineer seeking promotion to Staff Engineer.

COMPETENCY CRITERIA FOR THE TARGET LEVEL
Staff bar requires: cross-team technical influence, mentorship of senior engineers, and ownership of a system with org-wide impact.

EVIDENCE I HAVE
Led the migration to a new event bus adopted by four teams; mentored two senior engineers informally; wrote the RFC that became the team's default architecture pattern.

KNOWN GAPS
Mentorship was informal, never assigned officially, and I haven't yet presented at an all-hands or similar org-wide forum.

PHASE 1 — MAP EVIDENCE TO CRITERIA
For each criterion in the target level bar, find the strongest piece of evidence from what I gave you that demonstrates it, stated as a specific outcome with scope and impact — not a restated job duty. If a criterion has no strong evidence, say so explicitly rather than stretching a weak example to fit; a gap named honestly is more useful to my manager than a forced fit that a sharp committee member will see through.

PHASE 2 — ADDRESS THE KNOWN GAPS
For each gap I named, write one sentence that either reframes it with mitigating context (scope was limited by something outside my control) or names a concrete plan to close it — do not write defensive language that sounds like an excuse; state it as a fact and a forward plan.

PHASE 3 — ASSEMBLE THE DOCUMENT
Write a one-paragraph summary case at the top, stating the target level and the core argument in plain terms, before the detailed evidence-to-criteria mapping. This is the paragraph a busy committee member reads if they read nothing else, so it has to carry the whole argument on its own.

WHAT NOT TO DO
Do not use inflated language ("instrumental," "pivotal," "drove massive impact") without a specific number or scope backing it. Do not list every project I've touched — a promotion case is stronger with three well-evidenced criteria than ten thin ones.

OUTPUT FORMAT
1. Summary paragraph.
2. Criterion-by-criterion evidence mapping (criterion, evidence, scope/impact).
3. Gap acknowledgment section.
4. A one-line note on which criterion has the weakest supporting evidence, so I know what to strengthen before submitting.