Star stories
Extract projects from career docs (or user-pasted text) and convert each into a STAR-format Markdown file. One file per project, multiple STAR angles per file (technical, leadership, ambiguity, conflict, etc.). Output goes to $PERSONAL/career/star/. Use when the user says "STARify", "build STAR stories", "convert my projects to STAR", or asks to extract a single project to STAR.From its SKILL.md
npx -y skills add Rish-Modi/career-agent --skill star-storiesAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
2 things to look at
- no licenseNo license file was found in the repository. Code published without one is not open source by default, so using it at work is a question for whoever answers licensing questions where you are.
- 1 stars1 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
SKILL.md
6.9 KB, ~1.6k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
STAR Stories
When to use
- User says "STARify", "STARify my resume", "STARify [project name]", "build STAR stories"
- User wants to convert career-doc project entries into structured behavioral-interview ammo
- User pastes a project description and wants it formatted in STAR
- Before a hiring-manager or behavioral round, when the user needs ready-to-deliver project narratives
For mock interviews or curating which stories to lead with for a specific role, use interview-prep. STARify produces the raw material; interview-prep selects and rehearses it.
After STARifying a project (or batch of projects), suggest the user run /interview-prep in audit mode to refresh the competency index, or in cheat-sheet mode if there's an upcoming round the new stories should feed.
Inputs
$PERSONAL is the personal-docs sibling directory defined in CLAUDE.md. Resolve it once at the start of the session.
Source documents (read all that exist):
$PERSONAL/career/impact-doc.md— primary source. Has roles, projects, scope, metrics.$PERSONAL/career/brag-doc.md— wins and recognition. Cross-check metrics; brag doc often has sharper numbers.$PERSONAL/career/rish-career.md— narrative framing. Use to recover the why and the struggle behind a project, which often gets compressed out of impact-doc bullets.
Or: user-pasted project text. If the user pastes a single project description, skip the file reads and STARify the paste directly.
Modes
Mode 1: STARify the full portfolio
Triggered by: "STARify my resume", "build STAR stories for everything", "go through all my projects".
- Read the three source docs.
- Extract a deduped list of distinct projects. A "project" is a named piece of work with a beginning, a personal contribution, and an outcome (e.g., "Agentic Dev Team", "Bill's Design System MCP", "OPEX Notebook"). Not roles. Not skills. Not multi-year team initiatives that aren't yours.
- Present the list to the user before writing. Confirm the slug for each, ask which to skip, ask whether to merge any.
- For each confirmed project, write
$PERSONAL/career/star/<slug>.mdusing the template below.
Mode 2: STARify a single project
Triggered by: "STARify [project name]", or user pastes one project's worth of detail.
- Skip the list-and-confirm step.
- Pull whatever context exists about that project across the source docs (or just use the pasted text).
- Write
$PERSONAL/career/star/<slug>.md.
Mode 3: Update / refine an existing STAR file
Triggered by: "tighten the Agentic Dev Team story", "add a conflict angle to OPEX", "the metric is wrong in trinity-mcp.md".
- Read the existing file.
- Apply the requested edit.
- Preserve other angles in the file unless the user says to drop them.
File format
One file per project. Each file contains:
- Frontmatter with project metadata.
- Context block (2-3 sentences, role-agnostic background a reader needs).
- Multiple STAR angles, each tagged with the competencies it lands.
---
slug: agentic-dev-team
project: Agentic Dev Team
company: Bill
years: 2025-2026
scope: 10-agent SDLC pipeline, adopted across multiple teams
primary_competencies: [leadership, ambiguity, technical-depth, leverage]
---
# Agentic Dev Team
## Context
(2-3 sentences. What was the system, what team, what was the state of the world when you started. Reader should be able to evaluate the rest without back-and-forth.)
---
## Angle 1: Leadership / influence without authority
**Best for:** "Tell me about a time you drove a change without formal authority."
- **Situation:** ...
- **Task:** ...
- **Action:** ...
- **Result:** ...
## Angle 2: Ambiguity
**Best for:** "Describe a time you had to define the problem before solving it."
- **Situation:** ...
- **Task:** ...
- **Action:** ...
- **Result:** ...
## Angle 3: Technical depth / architecture
**Best for:** "Walk me through a technically complex system you designed."
- **Situation:** ...
- **Task:** ...
- **Action:** ...
- **Result:** ...
(Add more angles as the project supports them. A strong project supports 3-5 angles. Don't pad.)
---
## Quick-fire facts (for follow-ups)
- One-line scope:
- Key metrics:
- Who else was involved:
- What I'd do differently:
- Why this matters now:
Workflow rules
- Write in first person, past tense. "I built", not "we built" unless the action genuinely was a we. Surface the user's specific contribution.
- Action should be decision-driven, not task-driven. "I chose multi-agent over a single God-Agent because X" beats "I implemented an orchestrator class." Interviews reward judgment, not labor.
- Result must be quantified. Pull numbers from impact-doc / brag-doc. If a project's result is unquantified in the source files, flag it:
**RESULT-NEEDS-METRIC:** ...and ask the user inline. - Don't invent. If a detail isn't in the source material, write
[VERIFY]and ask. Never fabricate scope, names, or numbers. - Cross-reference, don't duplicate. If the OPEX story shares a competency with Agentic Dev Team, both files keep the angle but each frames it through its own project.
- Push back on weak angles. If a project doesn't actually support a "conflict" angle, don't force one. Note it:
## Angle X: Conflict — N/A for this project, see [other-project].md instead. - Slug rules: lowercase, kebab-case, short. Match how the project is referenced in impact-doc when possible.
Output discipline
- Files:
$PERSONAL/career/star/<slug>.md. Create the directory if missing. - If a file already exists, prompt: Overwrite (replace entirely), Merge (add new angles, preserve existing), or Cancel (print to terminal only).
- After writing, summarize: which files were created/updated, which angles are weakest and would benefit from a verification pass, and any
[VERIFY]orRESULT-NEEDS-METRICflags the user needs to resolve.
Anti-patterns
- Don't write a STAR file for a role (e.g., "Senior Engineer at Bill"). STARify projects, not job titles.
- Don't pad an angle if the project doesn't earn it. Three sharp angles beats five wishy-washy ones.
- Don't lead the Action with the technology choice. Lead with the decision/judgment, then explain what enabled it.
- Don't write a Result without a number unless the source material genuinely lacks one (then flag, don't fabricate).
- Never use em or en dashes (— –) in the output. Use commas, periods, colons, or parentheses.
- Don't bury the metric at the end of a long paragraph. Result section should land the number in the first sentence.
What ships with it
Read from the repository
Just SKILL.md. No reference files, no scripts.