---

name: hire-or-pass description: "Turn a hiring debrief into a typed decision — hire, hire at a different level, get more signal, or pass — from rubric evidence only, with probabilities and confidence. Use when asked should we hire this candidate, run the debrief, hire or no-hire, or when interviewers disagree and the manager has to call it. Produces the evidence state per competency, the four-way decision with probabilities, the act-or-hold verdict, and when holding, the exact competency to test and who tests it. Decision support for a human decision — a person owns the hire." version: 1.0.0

Hire or Pass

Debriefs go wrong when the loudest interviewer wins or when everyone waits to see what the manager thinks. This skill forces the evidence into a fixed shape — per competency, strongest example and strongest counter-example, from whom — and defines the four possible outcomes before the discussion starts. The output is a distribution over those outcomes and, when it is close, the specific extra signal to go get.

Boundary. This is decision support. A person makes and owns the hiring decision, applies the company's process and the law where they are, and is accountable for it. Never let a distribution replace that.

Where this sits

After hiring-rubric (which defines the competencies) and engineering-hiring-rubric, and after the interviews. This one runs the debrief decision.

What This Skill Produces

• The evidence state — per must-have competency: strongest example, strongest counter-example, which interviewer saw it, rubric scores
• The decision — hire / hire_at_different_level / more_signal / pass with probabilities and confidence
• Act or hold — thresholds applied; a close hire/pass is a more_signal by definition
• The signal plan — when holding: the competency to test, the format, who runs it, by when
• The debrief record — one paragraph for the file: evidence summary, decision, who decided

Required Inputs

Ask for these; do not infer from "vibes" or an interviewer's overall thumbs:

• role — title, level, the 3–5 must-have competencies from the rubric
• evidence — per competency: strongest observed example and strongest counter-example, with the interviewer who saw it
• scores — rubric scores per interviewer per competency
• references — if taken: confirmed or contradicted what
• risks — gaps, level mismatch, red flags with the evidence behind them
• process — any missed interviews or untested competencies

Framework: Four Defined Outcomes

Option	It applies when
hire	Every must-have competency has positive evidence from at least two interviewers, and no red flag has evidence behind it
hire_at_different_level	The evidence supports the competencies at a different level than the role was opened at
more_signal	A must-have was untested, or the evidence is split between interviewers — one targeted extra conversation decides it
pass	A must-have competency has negative evidence, or a red flag is substantiated

Thresholds. Act when confidence ≥ 0.65 and the winning option's probability ≥ 0.7. A close hire / pass is a more_signal outcome: name the competency and who tests it. Never decide on the distribution alone.

Evidence, not impressions. "Strong communicator" is an impression. "Explained the outage timeline to a non-engineer in the panel without being asked — seen by R." is evidence. Only evidence enters the state.

Getting probabilities. Any calibrated decision model that returns a probability per defined option serves this contract; the repo ships an adapter (node integrations/jev/decide.mjs hire-or-pass --state state.json, contract in integrations/jev/decisions/). Without one, the assistant estimates and labels it. Either way the decision is the hiring manager's.

Output Format

Debrief decision: [role, level] · candidate [initials]

Evidence by competency

Competency	Strongest example (who)	Strongest counter (who)	Scores
…	…	…	…

Decision

Option	Probability
hire	0.xx
hire_at_different_level	0.xx
more_signal	0.xx
pass	0.xx

Confidence: 0.xx · Source: [model / estimate]

Verdict: [act: option] or [hold → more_signal: competency, format, owner, by when] Debrief record: [one paragraph — evidence summary, the decision, who made it]

Quality Checks

• Every must-have has an evidence row; untested ones are marked and force more_signal
• Counter-examples are recorded, not just the good moments
• Red flags are listed with evidence or dropped
• All four probabilities shown; the verdict cites the thresholds
• The record names the human who decided
• Nothing in the state is a protected characteristic or a proxy for one

Anti-Patterns

• Overall thumbs replacing per-competency evidence
• Anchoring on the manager — collect scores before anyone speaks
• "Culture fit" as an undefined competency
• Deciding a coin flip — 0.5 / 0.5 hire/pass is a more_signal, always
• Letting the model hire — it produces evidence about evidence; a person decides

Example Trigger Phrases

• "Run the debrief — three interviewers, split panel."
• "Hire or pass on this candidate? Here are the scorecards."
• "We're at hire vs. pass 50/50 — what do we do?"