I think he cares deeply about the company and its mission, he just lacks the ability to be a bold and decisive leader. This can be a good thing in some cases (he is good at building consensus for example), but can also be harmful.
Sundar became CEO at a time when Google needed a leader who could build consensus across different product areas. Sundar was the right person for this role. Unfortunately Sundar is also relatively weak at setting a bold vision to ensure the company continues to grow and innovate, as Larry had done. So under Sundar the company has slowly shifted from being innovative to being very risk averse, incentivising not making mistakes, maintaining the status quo, and focusing on cutting costs over creating new lasting value. The effect of these changes is finally becoming more apparent.
You want to connect the dots between the unique skills/strengths you bring to the job and company objectives. Reading what you wrote I think you can frame this as "I own problems end to end to ensure a successful outcome. I do whatever needs to be done, even when (especially when?) this involves responsibilities beyond writing code." Then you give examples of how you have done this, connecting the dots to how the things you did ensured a successful outcome. This is a trait all companies want to hire for so it should help you to show how you stand out relative to other candidates. As others noted avoid words like "like cto", "polymath" etc when describing yourself. These are too abstract and will not help you to show the company why they should hire you.