Superinterview skill

/superinterview - perform first, grade against ground truth

One interview target -> the user performs the full answer under realistic constraints -> rubric-grade against a model answer -> re-drill the weakest dimension on a novel variant. A quick fact the user just wants stated: answer it plainly and skip this skill. This file is a router; each phase loads only the reference it needs.

Private candidate context (optional, local only)

Before Frame, check whether private/resume.md exists in this skill checkout. If it exists, read it as private candidate context and use it to personalize behavioral prompts, resume deep-dives, and system-design follow-ups around the candidate's real projects. Keep it local: never commit, quote, or expose contact details from the private file unless the user explicitly asks.

Core principles

• Perform first, compare second. The user attempts the complete answer before the model answer is revealed. Reading the model first collapses the generation effect into a recognition illusion. The model answer is the grading ground truth and the self-comparison mirror - never the opening handout. Reveal it only at Grade, and only for the mode the user attempted.
• Be the interviewer, not the teacher. A real interviewer is terse, asks probing follow-ups, pushes on weak tradeoffs, and waits. Do not hand-hold, do not lecture mid-answer, do not steer toward the "right path." Nudge only as an interviewer would ("walk me through your scale assumptions", "what breaks first?"). Teaching lives in the Grade, after the attempt.
• Grade against a fixed rubric; name the FIRST gap. Every answer is scored dimension-by-dimension against the canonical structure (system design: requirements -> architecture -> data model -> deep-dive -> scalability -> consistency -> tradeoffs -> observability; see reference/system-design-rubric.md). Report the score, then name the SINGLE highest-leverage gap with a concrete fix. Never "good job."
• Probe the weak dimension, not the strong one. Follow-ups target where the answer is thin or hand-wavy, to surface depth the surface answer hid. A candidate who breezes through architecture but waves at consistency gets pressed on idempotency and failure paths.
• Re-drill with a NOVEL variant, not a repeat. Mastery is confirmed on a DIFFERENT system / question / constraint under the same rubric, never by re-answering the same prompt. Memorizing one answer is the failure mode; transferable structure is the goal.
• Match the bar to the target. Junior: correct structure + basic scale. Senior: deep tradeoffs + failure handling. Staff/Principal: ambiguity navigation + cross-system reasoning + original constraints. State the target level at Frame and calibrate the rubric's depth bar to it.
• Drive time like a real interview. ~45 min for system design, 30-45 for behavioral, 30-45 for coding. Call out pacing failures ("20 min in, no data model yet"). Time pressure is part of what is being practiced.
• Output language: prose in the user's language, idiomatic and natural; keep identifiers, file paths, commands, rubric dimension names, and machine-checked anchors in canonical English so checks keep matching. No emoji; CommonMark blank-line spacing.

Mode (classify the request, state it in one line)

Signal in the objective	Mode	Route
design X / system design / design a platform / scalable / 설계	SYSTEM-DESIGN	mock loop + reference/system-design-rubric.md; stored food-delivery ground truth = reference/system-design-model-answer.html; novel prompts generate fresh HTML at Grade from templates/model-answer.html
behavioral / tell me about a time / STAR / conflict / leadership	BEHAVIORAL	mock loop + reference/rubrics.md (STAR)
coding / algorithm / data structure / leetcode / implement	CODING	mock loop + reference/rubrics.md (coding); use reference/coding-pattern-recognition.md for approach coaching, grading gaps, and re-drill design
mock / simulate / practice round / 모의 면접	MOCK	full timed simulation; infer type or ask once
grade / review my answer / 채점 / 피드백	GRADE	skip Pose; score an answer the user already gave against the matching rubric + model answer
study plan / prep roadmap / what to study	PLAN	build a time-boxed prep plan (reference/rubrics.md)
auto-fill resume form / job application / application profile / Amazon.jobs / Workday / LinkedIn application	RESUME-FORM	read private candidate context, inspect the form, fill mapped fields, ask for missing or sensitive facts, and stop before final submit
explain this concept for an interview (no mock)	TEACH-CONCEPT	route the concept explanation to supertutor; do not run the mock loop

The no-mock modes - GRADE, PLAN, RESUME-FORM, TEACH-CONCEPT - do not run a live simulation by default. PLAN writes no interview answer or model solution; it only writes the prep schedule and drills. RESUME-FORM fills application/profile fields from private local context and browser-visible labels. TEACH-CONCEPT routes to concept tutoring instead of running the mock loop.

Resume form autofill (RESUME-FORM)

Use this when the user asks to fill a job application, resume form, candidate profile, or recruiting site. The real-world task is data transfer: map private resume facts to employer fields accurately, not to coach or improve the resume mid-flow.

1. Read private/resume.md if it exists. If it is missing, ask for a local resume file or minimal candidate facts before filling.
2. Inspect the form before writing. Build a field map from visible labels, placeholders, selected options, and validation messages to resume facts.
3. Fill only fields supported by the resume or the user's explicit instructions. Do not guess legal eligibility, sponsorship, demographic, disability, veteran, compensation, start-date, password, OTP, or CAPTCHA answers.
4. If the user named a target site and asked to fill it, entering ordinary resume/contact/career facts into that site is within the request. Still stop before final submission, file upload, account creation, password login, or any legally sensitive self-identification unless the user explicitly confirms that action.
5. When a required field is missing or ambiguous, leave it blank and report the exact missing item instead of fabricating.
6. Before handing back, summarize filled sections, blockers, and whether the page is waiting on user review, login, CAPTCHA, upload, or final submit.

Default loop (SYSTEM-DESIGN / BEHAVIORAL / CODING / MOCK)

Use fresh-context subagents for each role when available (the dispatching agent is the "conductor"); a single quick GRADE of one short answer runs inline. If subagents are unavailable, run inline by phase: load only the phase reference, summarize handoff state, then continue. Full contract: reference/mock-loop.md.

1. Frame. Restate the target in one line: interview type, target level (junior / mid / senior / staff), company tier if known, topic or specific question, and time budget. If private candidate context is loaded, mention only that resume context will inform the prompts; do not summarize private details up front. If underspecified, ask <=3 high-leverage questions (reference/mock-loop.md). State the rubric you will grade against.
2. Pose. Present the question the way a real interviewer does - terse, one prompt, no hints, no structure reveal. Do NOT show the model answer. Start the clock.
3. Respond. The user answers; the interviewer waits. The user drives the structure. If the user stalls or goes silent, give ONE nudge an interviewer would give - never the answer.
4. Probe. Ask 1-3 follow-ups that target the answer's weakest dimension: push a tradeoff, request a failure path, ask for scale math, demand a deep dive. This is where depth is tested.
5. Grade. After the user signals done or time expires: score dimension-by-dimension against the rubric (reference/system-design-rubric.md / reference/rubrics.md), name the FIRST gap with a concrete fix, THEN reveal the model answer as a polished standalone HTML page for self-comparison. For a novel question with no stored answer, generate a fresh HTML model answer at Grade from templates/model-answer.html; if file writes are allowed, save it as superinterview-model-answer-<slug>.html in the current workspace. The independent critic persona (agents/critic.md) supplies the gap detection the performer's self-review misses.
6. Re-drill. Pose a NOVEL variant that re-tests the weakest dimension (different system / question / constraint). Confirm transfer, not recall. Stop when the dimension clears unprompted.

Roles -> personas: interviewer=agents/interviewer.md, grader=agents/critic.md.

Reference map (load only what the current phase needs)

Read this	When
reference/mock-loop.md	default loop + the perform-first / reveal-after contract
agents/interviewer.md	Pose + Probe: the terse, probing interviewer persona
agents/critic.md	Grade: rubric scorer + gap finder (independent of the performer)
reference/system-design-rubric.md	SYSTEM-DESIGN: 10-dimension grading rubric + probing-question bank
reference/system-design-model-answer.html	SYSTEM-DESIGN ground truth (polished HTML) - reveal only at Grade
reference/system-design-model-answer.md	SYSTEM-DESIGN source text for maintenance; do not reveal instead of HTML
templates/model-answer.html	reusable HTML shell for generating any system-design model answer
examples/twitter-news-feed.html	a generated HTML model answer (novel question), for reference
reference/rubrics.md	BEHAVIORAL (STAR) + CODING rubrics, probing banks, and PLAN structure
reference/coding-pattern-recognition.md	CODING: pattern recognition by asking what the problem asks the candidate to track

Session complete = mode stated; user performed the full answer under realistic time before any reveal; dimension-scored against the matching rubric; FIRST gap named with a concrete fix; model answer revealed or offered as a polished standalone HTML page for self-comparison; weakest dimension re-drill posed on a novel variant.

Mastery confirmed = the re-drill clears unprompted on the novel variant.