version: "1.0.2" name: interview description: 'Interview you one question at a time, each choice with a recommendation, to settle a big outcome before agents work alone. Use when: asked to interview you about a goal or plan.' practices: [bdd-gherkin, ddd-bounded-context, design-by-contract] hexagonal_role: domain consumes: [repo-context, native-work-state] produces: [caller-outcome, goal-acceptance] context_rel:

• kind: supplier-to

with: craft-goal skill_api_version: 1 user-invocable: true metadata: tier: execution dependencies: [] capabilities: [interview_caller, settle_caller_choices, write_acceptance_examples, settle_domain_terms] effects: [update_intent_source] canonical_status: canonical disposition: keep_strategy stability: stable output_contract: 'one question per turn with a labeled recommendation and tradeoff on each choice question; decided, terms, open and deferred lists the caller can see; settled decisions appended to the existing intent source within authority; a handoff to Craft Goal, RPI or Plan'

Interview

Shape a big outcome with the caller, one question per turn, before agents run alone: you look up facts; the caller makes choices and supplies what only they know. Interview creates nothing new (no goal, bead or file), changes no status, claim or closure, and only appends notes to an existing intent source (Show the state). To test a plan, design or decision the caller already holds, see a held plan.

Each turn

1. Look it up in the tracker, docs and code first. Ask the caller only for

choices (outcome, proof, non-goals, authority, budgets, priorities, risk tolerance) and for facts no source holds: what they tried or ruled out, their outside systems, what their users already do. Ask such a fact openly, with no recommendation, before the choices that rest on it. If the caller contradicts a source, cite both and ask whether the source is stale or the caller wants a change.

1. Pick the branch. Start with the outcome, then the open branch that most

changes acceptance, scope or authority whose prerequisites are settled. Keep dependent choices open rather than inventing their prerequisites. After each answer, reconsider which choice can now be settled; a changed parent decision reopens only the answers that rely on it. Defer branches that cannot change the next action, with a condition for returning to them.

1. Ask one question in this shape, so the caller can accept, amend or

reject in one line; a fact question omits the recommendation and tradeoff. Wait for the answer.

1. Record only what the caller decides, and a fact they supply as their

report, not a decision. A skip stays open; "your call" accepts the recommendation shown.

Settled: <what the last answer decided, or nothing yet>. Open: <count>.
Q<n>: <the decision>. <the question, with 2 to 4 options when they exist>
My recommendation: <answer>, because <source or reason>.
Tradeoff: <the one cost that matters>

Because "your call" turns the recommendation into scope, recommend only what the outcome needs. Add a criterion, safeguard, authority or budget the caller did not name only when the outcome fails without it or harm would land before anyone notices. Offer anything else costly to add later (stored data, a published interface, money, security) as an option, not as the recommendation. Never narrow what the caller asked for. Draw budget and authority options from a source (prior goals, the tracker, the caller's words); with none, ask openly.

Answerer

The caller answers by default. On request ("let a council answer my interview"), a council answers through Council's interview-panel mode; the caller accepts or amends its answers in one pass before anything is recorded, and authority, budgets and acceptance changes stay the caller's. Fact questions stay with the caller in this mode; the council answers only choices. If only another person can answer, keep the choice Open and offer a questionnaire for that person. The caller sends it; Interview contacts no one.

BDD: acceptance as examples

Drive each criterion to a Given/When/Then with an observable result and its proving evidence. Draft the example yourself as the recommendation; the caller accepts or edits it. "Works reliably" is not acceptance; ask what would be seen.

Given a Job has already completed
When the worker receives that Job again
Then it returns the completed result without a second side effect
# Proof: a redelivery test asserts one side effect and the completed result

DDD: one term per concept

When a word is vague, overloaded or has synonyms, ask which term the domain uses. Record one term with a one-line definition and use only it in examples, notes, code and tests. Domain owns deeper modeling.

Show the state

Show these lists on request, after a revision and at stop:

• Decided: each choice; acceptance carries its Given/When/Then and proof.

A fact the caller supplied appears here labeled as their report.

• Terms: each settled term with its one-line definition.
• Open: unanswered choices, most consequential first.
• Deferred: choices that change no next decision, and what revives them.

Number each choice Q<n> when first listed. As an item changes, Open and Deferred included, append its line to the intent source (root epic, issue or conversation) if the request or existing authorization covers editing it (the conversation always does); otherwise show it for the caller to append. The last line per Q<n> or term is current. Before treating acceptance as frozen by a running goal, confirm its current state from the native goal runtime or the caller. A saved Navigate checkpoint or open child build beads alone do not establish a running goal. If that state is unknown and matters to the proposed update, ask. While a goal runs, append no changed criterion or term; list it under Open in the conversation as an acceptance change for the caller to hold and re-craft. In BD:

bd context --json    # confirm the destination before any write
bd show <epic-id>    # on resume: the last line per Q<n> or term; start from Open
bd update <epic-id> --append-notes "decided Q<n>: <choice> | example: <Given/When/Then> | proof: <evidence>"
# or: "fact Q<n>: <report>" "term: <word> = <definition>" "open Q<n>: <choice>" "deferred Q<n>: <choice> | revive when <condition>"

Stop and hand off

Stop when the caller stops, the next question would only restate a settled answer, the work proves to be one slice (not when testing a held plan), or everything Craft Goal admission needs is settled:

1. outcome, and non-goals the caller named or rejected;
2. terminal acceptance, each criterion with its proving evidence;
3. authority: reads, writes, external effects, Git, and when agents must ask;
4. numeric wave and goal budgets and the HOLD threshold;
5. the first falsifiable question.

While the caller is still here, test the settled answers once. Then hand over the lists; the caller starts the next step: Craft Goal for several related experiments, RPI or Plan for one outcome with items 1 to 3 and real bounds. Open items stay open; never fill one to finish.