Interview users to convert rough ideas into structured specs. Use before starting non-trivial features.
Scanned 9/8/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add ils15/pantheon-legacy --skill interview --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Interview?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/ils15-interview-05711b90)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: interview
description: "Interview users to convert rough ideas into structured specs. Use before starting non-trivial features."
context: fork
globs: []
alwaysApply: false
---
# Interview — Idea to Spec
Use this skill to transform a rough idea into a structured spec before implementation. A 5-minute interview prevents hours of rework.
---
## Usage
Invoke via the `/sketch` command:
```
/sketch Add a notification system so users get alerted when their order ships
```
Or trigger Athena directly:
```
@athena: Interview me about this feature: real-time dashboard for agent cost tracking
```
---
## Interview Protocol
### Phase 1: Discover (3–5 questions, one at a time)
Ask questions in this priority order, stopping after you have enough clarity:
1. **Scope** — "What's the minimum viable version of this feature?"
2. **Users** — "Who uses this and what's their primary workflow?"
3. **Constraints** — "Are there tech, time, or integration constraints?"
4. **Success criteria** — "How will you know this is working correctly?"
5. **Non-goals** — "What should this explicitly NOT do?"
**Rules:**
- Ask **one question at a time** — never batch questions
- Wait for the answer before asking the next
- Stop asking when you have answers to at least 3 questions
- If the user is unsure, offer 2–3 concrete options to choose from
### Phase 2: Confirm Understanding
Before writing the spec, summarize your understanding in 2–3 sentences and ask: "Does this match what you have in mind, or did I miss anything?"
### Phase 3: Write the Spec
Produce the spec only after getting confirmation.
---
## Spec Output Format
```markdown
# Feature Spec: <Feature Name>
**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Status:** Draft
## Overview
<2–3 sentence description of the feature and its purpose>
## Goals
- <Goal 1>
- <Goal 2>
- <Goal 3>
## Non-Goals
- <What this feature explicitly does NOT cover>
- <Scope boundary 1>
- <Scope boundary 2>
## Functional Requirements
### Must Have (MVP)
- [ ] <Requirement 1>
- [ ] <Requirement 2>
- [ ] <Requirement 3>
### Should Have (v1.1)
- [ ] <Requirement 4>
### Won't Have (out of scope)
- <Explicitly excluded>
## Technical Constraints
- **Stack:** <relevant tech>
- **Integrations:** <APIs, services>
- **Performance:** <latency, throughput requirements if any>
- **Security:** <auth, data sensitivity>
## Success Criteria
- [ ] <Measurable outcome 1>
- [ ] <Measurable outcome 2>
## Open Questions
- [ ] <Unresolved decision 1>
- [ ] <Unresolved decision 2>
## Suggested Implementation Phases
1. **Phase 1:** <database/schema>
2. **Phase 2:** <backend API>
3. **Phase 3:** <frontend>
```
---
## After the Spec
Hand off to Athena or Zeus with the completed spec:
```
@athena: Use this spec to create a TDD implementation plan:
[paste spec]
```
Or for immediate orchestration:
```
@zeus: Implement this feature based on the spec:
[paste spec]
```
---
## Tips for Good Interviews
- **Anchor on user value** — every requirement should trace to a user need
- **Flag ambiguity early** — if a requirement is unclear, mark it as an Open Question rather than guessing
- **Keep MVP small** — the first version should be deliverable in one session
- **Distinguish wants from needs** — "should have" vs "must have" prevents scope creep
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!