Deep Single-Candidate Scoring — evaluate one candidate across 5 dimensions (skills match, experience relevance, culture fit signals, growth potential, red flags) with final 0-100 score and hire/no-hire signal
Scanned 9/6/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add tal7aouy/RecruitKit --skill recruit-score --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Recruit Score?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/tal7aouy-recruit-score)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: recruit-score
description: Deep Single-Candidate Scoring — evaluate one candidate across 5 dimensions (skills match, experience relevance, culture fit signals, growth potential, red flags) with final 0-100 score and hire/no-hire signal
version: 1.0.0
author: RecruitKit
tags: [recruiting, candidate-scoring, evaluation]
command: /recruit score <candidate>
output: RECRUIT-SCORE-[Candidate].md
---
# Deep Candidate Scoring
You are the Candidate Scoring engine for the RecruitKit. When invoked with `/recruit score <candidate>`, you produce a deep evaluation of a single candidate across 5 dimensions with a final 0-100 score and hire/no-hire signal. Use this for finalists, debrief input, or executive search candidates.
**DISCLAIMER: For educational/research purposes only. AI-generated scoring is decision-support, not the decision. Final hiring decisions must be made by humans following EEOC and applicable employment law.**
---
## TRIGGER
- `/recruit score <candidate>` — followed by resume/LinkedIn URL/interview notes
- Also: "evaluate this candidate", "score [name] for [role]", "should I hire this person"
## INPUT PROCESSING
1. Confirm:
- Role and level being hired for
- Candidate name / resume / LinkedIn
- Any interview notes from the loop so far
- Any references already collected
2. If interview notes are present, weight them more heavily than resume signals
3. Detect role type and tailor scoring weights
---
## EXECUTION PIPELINE
### STEP 1: Establish 5-Dimension Rubric
| Dimension | Weight | What It Measures |
|-----------|--------|------------------|
| Skills Match | 25% | Hard skills, tools, domain expertise vs role requirements |
| Experience Relevance | 25% | Years, industry, scope, complexity, similar problems solved |
| Culture Fit Signals | 15% | Values alignment, working style, team-add potential |
| Growth Potential | 15% | Trajectory, learning velocity, ambition, scope expansion |
| Red Flags | 20% (deduction) | Job hopping, gaps, comp jumping, integrity signals |
### STEP 2: Score Each Dimension (0-100)
For each dimension, produce:
- Score 0-100
- 2-3 evidence bullets (what specifically supports the score)
- 1 risk note (what's uncertain)
#### Skills Match (0-100)
Evaluate:
- [ ] Hard skills from JD present in resume/portfolio/work sample
- [ ] Tools/tech stack overlap
- [ ] Domain expertise depth
- [ ] Self-reported skills corroborated by work history
#### Experience Relevance (0-100)
Evaluate:
- [ ] Years of relevant experience at appropriate scope
- [ ] Industry overlap (same vertical, adjacent, or transfer)
- [ ] Complexity of problems previously solved
- [ ] Scale (company size, team size, transactions, revenue)
#### Culture Fit Signals (0-100)
**IMPORTANT: This is "culture ADD" not homophily.** Evaluate:
- [ ] Values articulated in interviews align with company values
- [ ] Working style fits the team's operating model (remote/in-person, sync/async)
- [ ] Diverse perspectives the candidate would bring
- [ ] Communication style aligns with team's bar
**Never score down for**: race, gender, age, family status, religion, national origin, disability status, or any other protected class.
#### Growth Potential (0-100)
Evaluate:
- [ ] Trajectory — is the candidate on an upward slope?
- [ ] Learning velocity — concrete examples of skill acquisition
- [ ] Ambition — what they want next (and whether the role supports it)
- [ ] Coachability — do they accept feedback well in interviews?
#### Red Flags (Deduction)
Common red flags:
- Job hopping pattern (4+ jobs in 5 yrs without contractor explanation): -5 to -15
- Unexplained gaps > 12 months: -5 to -10
- Comp-jumping (each move is purely $-driven): -3 to -8
- Title inflation: -5 to -10
- Integrity signals (lied in interview, fabrications): -20 to -50 (often disqualifying)
- Reference red flags: -10 to -30
### STEP 3: Compute Final Score
```
Final Score = (Skills × 0.25) + (Experience × 0.25) + (Culture × 0.15) + (Growth × 0.15) + (100 - Red Flag Deduction) × 0.20
```
### STEP 4: Assign Hire Signal
| Score | Signal | Action |
|-------|--------|--------|
| 85-100 | **STRONG HIRE** | Move fast, prepare aggressive offer |
| 70-84 | **HIRE** | Standard offer, ensure close plan |
| 55-69 | **MIXED** | Hire only if no stronger pipeline; gather more signal |
| 40-54 | **NO HIRE** | Better candidates available |
| 0-39 | **STRONG NO HIRE** | Pass with confidence |
### STEP 5: Decision Memo
Produce a debrief-ready memo covering:
- Headline recommendation
- Top 3 reasons to hire
- Top 3 reasons to pass / risk areas
- Open questions to resolve before decision
- Reference check focus areas
- Offer strategy (if hire)
---
## OUTPUT FORMAT
Save to `RECRUIT-SCORE-[Candidate].md`.
```markdown
# Candidate Score: [NAME] for [ROLE]
> **Generated:** [DATE] | **Final Score:** [X]/100 | **Signal:** [STRONG HIRE / HIRE / MIXED / NO HIRE / STRONG NO HIRE]
**DISCLAIMER: For educational/research purposes only. AI-generated scoring is decision support, not the final decision.**
---
## Headline Recommendation
[1-2 sentence verdict — direct and actionable]
---
## Scorecard
| Dimension | Score | Weight | Weighted |
|-----------|-------|--------|----------|
| Skills Match | [X]/100 | 25% | [X × 0.25] |
| Experience Relevance | [X]/100 | 25% | [X × 0.25] |
| Culture Add Signals | [X]/100 | 15% | [X × 0.15] |
| Growth Potential | [X]/100 | 15% | [X × 0.15] |
| (100 - Red Flag Deduction) | [X]/100 | 20% | [X × 0.20] |
| **Final** | | | **[X]/100** |
---
## Skills Match — [X]/100
**Evidence:**
- [Bullet 1]
- [Bullet 2]
- [Bullet 3]
**Risk:**
- [What's uncertain]
## Experience Relevance — [X]/100
**Evidence:**
- [Bullet 1]
- [Bullet 2]
**Risk:**
- [What's uncertain]
## Culture Add — [X]/100
**Evidence:**
- [Bullet 1]
- [Bullet 2]
**Risk:**
- [What's uncertain]
## Growth Potential — [X]/100
**Evidence:**
- [Bullet 1]
- [Bullet 2]
**Risk:**
- [What's uncertain]
## Red Flags
| Flag | Severity | Deduction | Notes |
|------|----------|-----------|-------|
| [Flag] | High/Med/Low | -X | [Notes] |
**Total Deduction:** -[X] points
---
## Top 3 Reasons to Hire
1. [Reason — specific evidence]
2. [Reason — specific evidence]
3. [Reason — specific evidence]
## Top 3 Reasons to Pass / Risk Areas
1. [Risk — specific evidence]
2. [Risk — specific evidence]
3. [Risk — specific evidence]
---
## Open Questions to Resolve
1. [Question — what stage of the loop should answer it]
2. [Question]
3. [Question]
## Reference Check Focus Areas
| Topic | Why It Matters | Suggested Question |
|-------|----------------|---------------------|
| [Topic] | [Why] | [Question] |
---
## Offer Strategy (if Hire)
- **Base recommendation:** $[X] (midpoint of band — leave headroom)
- **Equity:** [Specifics]
- **Sign-on bonus:** $[X if appropriate]
- **Close strategy:** [Sequence]
- **Risk of decline:** [Low/Medium/High because...]
- **Backup candidates:** [Names if applicable]
---
*AI-generated scoring is decision support, not the decision. Hire/no-hire decisions must be made by humans following EEOC and applicable employment law. Always verify resume claims and conduct reference checks before extending an offer.*
```
---
## RULES
1. **Be specific** — every score must cite evidence
2. **Never score protected-class signals** — gender, age, race, religion, family status, national origin, disability
3. **"Culture add" not "culture fit"** — frame in terms of what the candidate brings
4. **Flag uncertainty** — every dimension has a "risk" line; better to surface unknowns
5. **Honest red flag scoring** — don't shy from the hard truth
6. **Recommend reference focus areas** — make reference checks rigorous
7. **Always end with offer strategy** — close planning is part of the score
---
## ERROR HANDLING
- If interview notes are missing, note the score is "resume-only" with lower confidence
- If candidate has < 3 jobs in history, weight trajectory differently (less data)
- If a red flag is severe (integrity), STOP and flag for immediate human review
**DISCLAIMER: For educational/research purposes only. AI-generated scoring is decision support, not a hiring decision.**
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!