Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add RainMT-dv/skills-pack --skill interview-megit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/RainMT-dv/skills-packWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/rainmt-dv/skills-pack/interview-me)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/rainmt-dv/skills-pack/interview-me"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rainmt-dv/skills-pack/interview-me/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/rainmt-dv/skills-pack/interview-me"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rainmt-dv/skills-pack/interview-me.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00108 | $0.03229 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00043 | $0.01292 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00646 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00323 |
Grade A, and why
interview-me scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
This is a copy
100% identical to interview-me — 10 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 226 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Interview Me
Overview
What people ask for and what they actually want are different things. They ask for "a dashboard" because that's what one asks for, not because a dashboard solves their problem. They say "make it faster" without a number to hit.
The cheapest moment to find this gap is before any plan, spec, or code exists. Once you've started building, switching costs are real, and the user will rationalize the wrong thing into a "good enough" thing. The misfit gets locked in.
This skill closes the gap before it costs anything. The other Define-phase skills assume you already know roughly what you want: idea-refine generates variations from an idea, spec-driven-development writes the requirements down, doubt-driven-development stress-tests a plan after you've drafted one. Interview-me is the part before all of those, where you ask one question at a time, with your best guess attached, until you can predict what the user is going to say before they say it.
When to Use
Apply this skill when:
- The ask is missing at least one of: who the user is, why they want it, what success looks like, what the binding constraint is
- The request is conventional rather than specific ("build me X", "make it faster") and you can't unpack the convention without guessing
- You're tempted to start with assumptions you haven't surfaced
- The user hasn't said which value they're optimizing for when two reasonable ones are in tension (simplicity vs. flexibility, cost vs. speed)
- The user explicitly invokes: "interview me", "grill me", "before we start, are we sure?", "stress-test my thinking"
When NOT to use:
- The ask is unambiguous and self-contained ("rename this variable", "fix this typo")
- The user has explicitly asked for speed over verification
- Pure information requests ("how does X work?", "what does this code do?")
- Mechanical operations (renames, formats, file moves)
- You already have ≥95% confidence; re-read the stop condition below before assuming you don't
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 1mo ago First seen · 226 lines · 108 tokens per session scan A 1d94741d10d2
interview-me is a skill published in the GitHub repository RainMT-dv/skills-pack (2 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 108 tokens to every session and 3,229 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to interview-me, differing in 10 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
architecture-review
Before committing to an implementation plan, run this skill to stress-test the proposed architecture. Catches over-engineering, circular dependencies, missing failure modes, security gaps, and scalability cliffs — before any code is written. Acts as a "second eye" on the plan.
code-review
Systematic code review skill covering both requesting a review (pre-commit checklist) and receiving and responding to review feedback. Checks code quality, security, test coverage, architectural alignment, and documentation before any code is committed.
github
Manages all git operations (commit, push, branch management, PR creation) in a standardized, safe, and consistent way. Automatically runs the code-review skill before any commit. Enforces Conventional Commits standard. Handles the full lifecycle: branch → review → commit → push → PR.
incident-response
When something breaks in production: triage the severity, gather evidence, identify root cause, deploy a fix or mitigation, and write a post-mortem. Provides a calm, structured process for high-stress moments.
prompt-enhancer
TÜRKÇE AÇIKLAMA ─────────────── Bu skill, belirsiz veya eksik bir kullanıcı isteğini alır ve onu daha net, daha spesifik, daha uygulanabilir bir prompt'a dönüştürür. Agent'ın yanlış anlayarak iş yapmasını önler. "Şunu düzelt" gibi muğlak bir istek, "hangi koşulda ne bekleniyor, başarı kriteri ne" formatına çevrilir.
writing-plans
TÜRKÇE AÇIKLAMA ─────────────── Bu skill, onaylanmış bir scope veya fikirden somut, uygulanabilir bir implementasyon planı üretir. Hangi dosya değişecek, hangi sırayla, kim yapacak, ne kadar sürecek, hangi riskler var — hepsini netleştirir. Planın çıktısı doğrudan executing-plans veya dispatching-parallel-agents…