Expert Interview Prep

---
name: expert-interview-prep
description: "Get the most from an hour with an expert — the do-your-homework floor (never ask what's googleable), the question arc from calibration to the frontier, the follow-up discipline that goes deep instead of wide, and the capture that survives the call. Use when asked prep me for the expert call, what should I ask this advisor/analyst/practitioner, we get an hour with X, or our expert calls are pleasant but shallow. Produces the homework brief, the question arc, the follow-up toolkit, and the capture plan."
homepage: https://mohitagw15856.github.io/pm-claude-skills/skill/expert-interview-prep.html
metadata:
  {
    "openclaw": { "emoji": "🧠" }
  }
---

# Expert Interview Prep Skill

An hour with a real expert is expensive and perishable — and most of it gets spent badly: fifteen minutes of questions the expert's own writing already answers, a list marched through on schedule while the expert's best tangent dies unfollowed, and notes that resolve to "great conversation." The prep flips the economics: homework raises the starting altitude (the call begins where public knowledge ends), the question arc is designed (calibration → the core unknowns → the frontier questions only this person can answer), and the discipline in the room is *follow-up over coverage* — the fifth "why" beats the ninth topic.

## What This Skill Produces

- **The homework brief** — what the expert has already said publicly (writing, talks, the searchable record), so no question re-asks it
- **The question arc** — calibration openers → the core unknowns (ranked, since time will run out) → the only-this-person frontier questions
- **The follow-up toolkit** — the probes that go deep: "what's an example?", "who disagrees with that and why?", "what would change your mind?"
- **The capture plan** — recording/notes division, the same-day synthesis, and the repo deposit ([research-repo-setup](../research-repo-setup/SKILL.md))

## Required Inputs

Ask for these if not provided:
- **The expert and the occasion** — who, their actual expertise edges (experts are spiky — the prep aims at their peaks), and the relationship (a paid analyst call, a courtesy favor, a potential advisor — the register differs)
- **The decision the call feeds** — what the team will do differently after; questions trace to it or get cut ([desk-research-sprint](../desk-research-sprint/SKILL.md) decomposition applies)
- **The current belief state** — what the team thinks it knows, including the shaky parts; the best expert questions test beliefs, and hidden beliefs can't be tested
- **The time box** — 30 vs. 60 minutes changes the arc's ambition; both change what gets pre-sent

## Framework: The Prep Rules

1. **Homework to the public frontier:** read what they've written, watch the talk, know their stated positions — then open questions with "you've written that X — …" which simultaneously (a) skips the retread, (b) signals seriousness (experts calibrate their effort to the asker's), and (c) earns the right to push on the position. Asking a googleable question tells the expert which hour this will be.
2. **The arc: calibrate, core, frontier:** two calibration questions (their current view, what's changed lately — cheap, warms the channel, catches stale homework) → the ranked core unknowns (the decision-critical questions, best first — time *will* run out) → the frontier ("what's nobody asking about this?", "where is the conventional wisdom wrong?") — the questions with no other source.
3. **Follow-up beats coverage:** the standing rule — when an answer surprises, *stay* ("say more," "what's a concrete case?", "who disagrees?") — a list fully covered at survey depth loses to three questions at mechanism depth. The list is a map, not a contract; ranked order means the sacrificed questions are the right ones.
4. **Test beliefs explicitly:** at least one question stakes the team's current belief for demolition — "we're operating on the assumption that X; where is that wrong?" Experts correct stated beliefs far more usefully than they answer open questions; the correction is often the call's whole ROI.
5. **Capture with epistemics, same day:** note *claims vs. opinions vs. hearsay* as the expert frames them ("everyone's seeing" ≠ "my data shows"), synthesize same-day while tone and emphasis survive, deposit to the repo with the expert-single-source confidence grade — one expert is one (excellent) source, and the [source-triangulation](../source-triangulation/SKILL.md) rules apply to their numbers too.

## Output Format

# Expert Call Prep: [expert] — [T] min, feeds [the decision]

## Homework Brief
[Their public positions relevant to us · the quotes worth referencing · the stale-check question]

## The Arc
**Calibration:** [2 openers] · **Core (ranked):** [the unknowns, best-first, each traced to the decision] · **Frontier:** [the only-this-person questions]

## The Toolkit
[The follow-up probes · the belief-test question, staked · the time-checkpoint rule (at T/2, jump to the top unasked core question)]

## Capture
[Recording/notes split · claims-vs-opinions marking · same-day synthesis · repo deposit with confidence grade]

## Quality Checks

- [ ] No question on the list is answerable by their public record
- [ ] Core questions are ranked and traced to the decision
- [ ] The belief-test question stakes a real current assumption
- [ ] The follow-up rule outranks the coverage instinct, explicitly
- [ ] Capture distinguishes claims, opinions, and hearsay

## Anti-Patterns

- [ ] Do not spend expert-minutes on googleable questions — the hour starts at the public frontier or it's a podcast
- [ ] Do not march the list — the surprising answer is the call's best moment; follow it
- [ ] Do not ask only open questions — staked beliefs get corrected; blank slates get lectures
- [ ] Do not treat expert assertion as established fact — one source, graded accordingly, numbers triangulated
- [ ] Do not synthesize next week — expert calls decay overnight into "it was really useful"