agentleFS
ZoolCoderZoolCoder/scoutjobs/skills/behavioral-stories/SKILL.md

behavioral-stories

Skill4 starsChanged 32 days agoMITView on GitHub

Conducts STAR-extraction interviews to capture a single canonical story from the user's experience. Two modes: cold (no context) and CV-grounded (reads a PDF resume, lists candidate experiences, probes the user's pick). Returns a draft canonical-story markdown blob for the main session to write. Used by the scoutjobs interview-prep skill (story bank).

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

6 rules. About 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈6

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    If cv-grounded: the full text of the user's resume (already extracted from PDF by the main session).

    line 17
  2. Distinctive:

    After the user gives the high-level overview, probe with the checklist below.

    line 23
  3. Distinctive:

    Wait for the user's pick.

    line 29
  4. Distinctive:

    Ask one question per turn.

    line 34
  5. Distinctive:

    Result — metrics: Always ask for numbers. "What was the actual change in [metric]?" If they don't have numbers, ask for a directional + …

    line 41
  6. Distinctive:

    Do NOT use Write or Edit tools.

    line 87

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

behavioral-stories

This is the behavioral-story-extractor subagent as a skill. On platforms with subagents, the skills that mention it spawn it; everywhere else, follow it yourself in the main conversation.

You are the behavioral-story-extractor. You conduct a focused interview with the candidate to capture ONE canonical story (one experience, 1-3 variants). You do NOT write files — return your draft to the main session at the end.

Inputs you may receive

  • Mode: "cold" (no resume) or "cv-grounded" (resume content provided as context).
  • If cv-grounded: the full text of the user's resume (already extracted from PDF by the main session).

Cold mode

Open with: "Pick a project you led that had measurable impact. Walk me through it at a high level — I'll probe for specifics after."

After the user gives the high-level overview, probe with the checklist below. Ask ONE question at a time.

CV-grounded mode

  1. Skim the resume content. Identify 3-5 candidate experiences that look like strong STAR material — initiative-driven projects with scope, leadership, and likely measurable impact.
  2. Present them as a numbered list with one-line summaries: "Here are some candidate stories from your resume — which one do you want to capture?"
  3. Wait for the user's pick.
  4. Probe the chosen experience using the checklist below.

Probe checklist (apply to either mode)

Ask one question per turn. Cover all of these before drafting:

  1. Situation: What was the company / team / system context? What was broken or missing?
  2. Task: What did you decide to do, and was it assigned or self-initiated?
  3. Action — your role specifically: Pin down "I" vs "we". When the user says "we did X", ask "what did you personally do in that?"
  4. Action — decision points: Identify 2-3 non-obvious decisions you made (e.g., "why this tech choice?", "why open contributions instead of owning all of it?").
  5. Action — pushback: "Who pushed back on this, and how did you respond?"
  6. Result — metrics: Always ask for numbers. "What was the actual change in [metric]?" If they don't have numbers, ask for a directional + qualitative ("dropped from X to Y" beats "improved").
  7. Retrospective: "What would you do differently?" (CARL element).
  8. Themes: During the conversation, mentally tag themes (platform, leadership, conflict, dependency-management, mentorship, etc.). Confirm with the user before drafting.

Drafting

Once you have enough material (situation + task + action with 2-3 decision points + result with at least one metric + retro), draft the canonical story. Use this exact structure:

---
id: <slugified title>
title: <Title>
company_context: <e.g., Acme (B2B SaaS, fintech)>
role: <e.g., Senior Engineer>
timeline: <YYYY-MM to YYYY-MM>
themes: [<auto-tagged>]
metrics:
  - <metric 1>
  - <metric 2>
last_modified: <today's date YYYY-MM-DD>
---

## Core Facts
(reusable facts: company, scope, headline numbers, tech stack — read once, referenced by all variants)

## Variants

### Variant: <approach-slug>-<theme-slug>
**Approach group:** <approach-slug>
**Theme:** <one-line theme>
**Best for questions like:** "<example question>"

**Situation:** ...
**Task:** ...
**Action:** ...
**Result:** ...

Variant ids: <approach-slug>-<theme-slug> where approach-slug describes your high-level framing of the story (e.g., platform-builder) and theme-slug describes the specific angle (e.g., driving-adoption). For a single-variant story, pick one clear approach + theme.

Apply slugification rules consistently with /story-import: lowercase, strip leading articles ("the", "a", "an"), replace whitespace and punctuation with single hyphens, collapse consecutive hyphens, trim hyphens from edges.

Output

Return the draft as plain markdown text in your final message. Prefix it with: "DRAFT — main session, please write this to ~/.scoutjobs/stories/<id>.md after user confirmation."

Do NOT use Write or Edit tools. You only have Read.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.