@elizaos/skills 2.0.0-alpha.3

package/skills/security-culture-index/skills/interpreting-culture-index/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,293 @@
+---
+name: interpreting-culture-index
+description: Use when interpreting Culture Index surveys, CI profiles, behavioral assessments, or personality data. Supports individual interpretation, team composition (gas/brake/glue), burnout detection, profile comparison, hiring profiles, manager coaching, interview transcript analysis for trait prediction, candidate debrief, onboarding planning, and conflict mediation. Handles PDF vision or JSON input.
+---
+
+<essential_principles>
+
+**Culture Index measures behavioral traits, not intelligence or skills. There is no "good" or "bad" profile.**
+
+<principle name="never-compare-absolutes">
+**Never compare absolute trait values between people.**
+
+The 0-10 scale is just a ruler. What matters is **distance from the red arrow** (population mean at 50th percentile). The arrow position varies between surveys based on EU.
+
+**Why the arrow moves:** Higher EU scores cause the arrow to plot further right; lower EU causes it to plot further left. This does not affect validity—we always measure distance from wherever the arrow lands.
+
+**Wrong**: "Dan has higher autonomy than Jim because his A is 8 vs 5"
+**Right**: "Dan is +3 centiles from his arrow; Jim is +1 from his arrow"
+
+Always ask: Where is the arrow, and how far is the dot from it?
+</principle>
+
+<principle name="survey-vs-job">
+**Survey = who you ARE. Job = who you're TRYING TO BE.**
+
+> **"You can't send a duck to Eagle school."** Traits are hardwired—you can only modify behaviors temporarily, at the cost of energy.
+
+- **Top graph (Survey Traits)**: Hardwired by age 12-16. Does not change. Writing with your dominant hand.
+- **Bottom graph (Job Behaviors)**: Adaptive behavior at work. Can change. Writing with your non-dominant hand.
+
+Large differences between graphs indicate behavior modification, which drains energy and causes burnout if sustained 3-6+ months.
+</principle>
+
+<principle name="distance-interpretation">
+**Distance from arrow determines trait strength.**
+
+| Distance | Label | Percentile | Interpretation |
+|----------|-------|------------|----------------|
+| On arrow | Normative | 50th | Flexible, situational |
+| ±1 centile | Tendency | ~67th | Easier to modify |
+| ±2 centiles | Pronounced | ~84th | Noticeable difference |
+| ±4+ centiles | Extreme | ~98th | Hardwired, compulsive, predictable |
+
+**Key insight:** Every 2 centiles of distance = 1 standard deviation.
+
+Extreme traits drive extreme results but are harder to modify and less relatable to average people.
+</principle>
+
+<principle name="l-and-i-exception">
+**L (Logic) and I (Ingenuity) use absolute values.**
+
+Unlike A, B, C, D, you CAN compare L and I scores directly between people:
+- Logic 8 means "High Logic" regardless of arrow position
+- Ingenuity 2 means "Low Ingenuity" for anyone
+
+Only these two traits break the "no absolute comparison" rule.
+</principle>
+
+</essential_principles>
+
+<input_formats>
+
+**JSON (Use if available)**
+
+If JSON data is already extracted, use it directly:
+```python
+import json
+with open("person_name.json") as f:
+    profile = json.load(f)
+```
+
+JSON format:
+```json
+{
+  "name": "Person Name",
+  "archetype": "Architect",
+  "survey": {
+    "eu": 21,
+    "arrow": 2.3,
+    "a": [5, 2.7],
+    "b": [0, -2.3],
+    "c": [1, -1.3],
+    "d": [3, 0.7],
+    "logic": [5, null],
+    "ingenuity": [2, null]
+  },
+  "job": { "..." : "same structure as survey" },
+  "analysis": {
+    "energy_utilization": 148,
+    "status": "stress"
+  }
+}
+```
+
+Note: Trait values are `[absolute, relative_to_arrow]` tuples. Use the relative value for interpretation.
+
+Check same directory as PDF for matching `.json` file, or ask user if they have extracted JSON.
+
+**PDF Input (MUST EXTRACT FIRST)**
+
+⚠️ **NEVER use visual estimation for trait values.** Visual estimation has 20-30% error rate.
+
+When given a PDF:
+1. Check if JSON already exists (same directory as PDF, or ask user)
+2. If not, run extraction with verification:
+   ```bash
+   uv run {baseDir}/scripts/extract_pdf.py --verify /path/to/file.pdf [output.json]
+   ```
+3. Visually confirm the verification summary matches the PDF
+4. Use the extracted JSON for interpretation
+
+**If uv is not installed:** Stop and instruct user to install it (`brew install uv` or `pip install uv`). Do NOT fall back to vision.
+
+**PDF Vision (Reference Only)**
+
+Vision may be used ONLY to verify extracted values look reasonable, NOT to extract trait scores.
+
+</input_formats>
+
+<intake>
+
+**Step 0: Do you have JSON or PDF?**
+
+1. **If JSON provided or found:** Use it directly (skip extraction)
+   - Check same directory as PDF for `.json` file with matching name
+   - Check if user provided JSON path
+2. **If only PDF:** Run extraction script with `--verify` flag
+   ```bash
+   uv run {baseDir}/scripts/extract_pdf.py --verify /path/to/file.pdf [output.json]
+   ```
+3. **If extraction fails:** Report error, do NOT fall back to vision
+
+**Step 1: What data do you have?**
+
+- **CI Survey JSON** → Proceed to Step 2
+- **CI Survey PDF** → Extract first (Step 0), then proceed to Step 2
+- **Interview transcript only** → Go to option 8 (predict traits from interview)
+- **No data yet** → "Please provide Culture Index profile (PDF or JSON) or interview transcript"
+
+**Step 2: What would you like to do?**
+
+**Profile Analysis:**
+1. **Interpret an individual profile** - Understand one person's traits, strengths, and challenges
+2. **Analyze team composition** - Assess gas/brake/glue balance, identify gaps
+3. **Detect burnout signals** - Compare Survey vs Job, flag stress/frustration
+4. **Compare multiple profiles** - Understand compatibility, collaboration dynamics
+5. **Get motivator recommendations** - Learn how to engage and retain someone
+
+**Hiring & Candidates:**
+6. **Define hiring profile** - Determine ideal CI traits for a role
+7. **Coach manager on direct report** - Adjust management style based on both profiles
+8. **Predict traits from interview** - Analyze interview transcript to estimate CI traits
+9. **Interview debrief** - Assess candidate fit based on predicted traits
+
+**Team Development:**
+10. **Plan onboarding** - Design first 90 days based on new hire and team profiles
+11. **Mediate conflict** - Understand friction between two people using their profiles
+
+**Provide the profile data (JSON or PDF) and select an option, or describe what you need.**
+
+</intake>
+
+<routing>
+
+| Response | Workflow |
+|----------|----------|
+| "extract", "parse pdf", "convert pdf", "get json from pdf" | `workflows/extract-from-pdf.md` |
+| 1, "individual", "interpret", "understand", "analyze one", "single profile" | `workflows/interpret-individual.md` |
+| 2, "team", "composition", "gaps", "balance", "gas brake glue" | `workflows/analyze-team.md` |
+| 3, "burnout", "stress", "frustration", "survey vs job", "energy", "flight risk" | `workflows/detect-burnout.md` |
+| 4, "compare", "compatibility", "collaboration", "multiple", "two profiles" | `workflows/compare-profiles.md` |
+| 5, "motivate", "engage", "retain", "communicate" | Read `references/motivators.md` directly |
+| 6, "hire", "hiring profile", "role profile", "recruit", "what profile for" | `workflows/define-hiring-profile.md` |
+| 7, "manage", "coach", "1:1", "direct report", "manager" | `workflows/coach-manager.md` |
+| 8, "transcript", "interview", "predict traits", "guess", "estimate", "recording" | `workflows/predict-from-interview.md` |
+| 9, "debrief", "should we hire", "candidate fit", "proceed", "offer" | `workflows/interview-debrief.md` |
+| 10, "onboard", "new hire", "integrate", "starting", "first 90 days" | `workflows/plan-onboarding.md` |
+| 11, "conflict", "friction", "mediate", "not working together", "clash" | `workflows/mediate-conflict.md` |
+| "conversation starters", "how to talk to", "engage with" | Read `references/conversation-starters.md` directly |
+
+**After reading the workflow, follow it exactly.**
+
+</routing>
+
+<verification_loop>
+
+After every interpretation, verify:
+
+1. **Did you use relative positions?** Never stated "A is 8" without context
+2. **Did you reference the arrow?** All trait interpretations relative to arrow
+3. **Did you compare Survey vs Job?** Identified any behavior modification
+4. **Did you avoid value judgments?** No traits called "good" or "bad"
+5. **Did you check EU?** Energy utilization calculated if both graphs present
+
+Report to user:
+- "Interpretation complete"
+- Key findings (2-3 bullet points)
+- Recommended actions
+
+</verification_loop>
+
+<reference_index>
+
+**Domain Knowledge** (in `references/`):
+
+**Primary Traits:**
+- `primary-traits.md` - A (Autonomy), B (Social), C (Pace), D (Conformity)
+
+**Secondary Traits:**
+- `secondary-traits.md` - EU (Energy Units), L (Logic), I (Ingenuity)
+
+**Patterns:**
+- `patterns-archetypes.md` - Behavioral patterns, trait combinations, archetypes
+
+**Application:**
+- `motivators.md` - How to motivate each trait type
+- `team-composition.md` - Gas, brake, glue framework
+- `anti-patterns.md` - Common interpretation mistakes
+- `conversation-starters.md` - How to engage each pattern and trait type
+- `interview-trait-signals.md` - Signals for predicting traits from interviews
+
+</reference_index>
+
+<workflows_index>
+
+**Workflows** (in `workflows/`):
+
+| File | Purpose |
+|------|---------|
+| `extract-from-pdf.md` | Extract profile data from Culture Index PDF to JSON format |
+| `interpret-individual.md` | Analyze single profile, identify archetype, summarize strengths/challenges |
+| `analyze-team.md` | Assess team balance (gas/brake/glue), identify gaps, recommend hires |
+| `detect-burnout.md` | Compare Survey vs Job, calculate EU utilization, flag risk signals |
+| `compare-profiles.md` | Compare multiple profiles, assess compatibility, collaboration dynamics |
+| `define-hiring-profile.md` | Define ideal CI traits for a role, identify acceptable patterns and red flags |
+| `coach-manager.md` | Help managers adjust their style for specific direct reports |
+| `predict-from-interview.md` | Analyze interview transcripts to predict CI traits before survey |
+| `interview-debrief.md` | Assess candidate fit using predicted traits from transcript analysis |
+| `plan-onboarding.md` | Design first 90 days based on new hire profile and team composition |
+| `mediate-conflict.md` | Understand and address friction between team members using their profiles |
+
+</workflows_index>
+
+<quick_reference>
+
+**Trait Colors:**
+| Trait | Color | Measures |
+|-------|-------|----------|
+| A | Maroon | Autonomy, initiative, self-confidence |
+| B | Yellow | Social ability, need for interaction |
+| C | Blue | Pace/Patience, urgency level |
+| D | Green | Conformity, attention to detail |
+| L | Purple | Logic, emotional processing |
+| I | Cyan | Ingenuity, inventiveness |
+
+**Energy Utilization Formula:**
+```
+Utilization = (Job EU / Survey EU) × 100
+
+70-130% = Healthy
+>130% = STRESS (burnout risk)
+<70% = FRUSTRATION (flight risk)
+```
+
+**Gas/Brake/Glue:**
+| Role | Trait | Function |
+|------|-------|----------|
+| Gas | High A | Growth, risk-taking, driving results |
+| Brake | High D | Quality control, risk aversion, finishing |
+| Glue | High B | Relationships, morale, culture |
+
+**Score Precision:**
+| Value | Precision | Example |
+|-------|-----------|---------|
+| Traits (A,B,C,D,L,I) | Integer 0-10 | 0, 1, 2, ... 10 |
+| Arrow position | Tenths | 0.4, 2.2, 3.8 |
+| Energy Units (EU) | Integer | 11, 31, 45 |
+
+</quick_reference>
+
+<success_criteria>
+
+A well-interpreted Culture Index profile:
+- Uses relative positions (distance from arrow), never absolute values alone
+- Identifies the archetype/pattern correctly
+- Highlights 2-3 key strengths based on leading traits
+- Notes 2-3 challenges or development areas
+- Compares Survey vs Job if both are available
+- Provides actionable recommendations
+- Avoids value judgments ("good"/"bad")
+- Acknowledges Culture Index is one data point, not a complete picture
+
+</success_criteria>

package/skills/security-culture-index/skills/interpreting-culture-index/references/anti-patterns.md

@@ -0,0 +1,255 @@
+<overview>
+
+Common mistakes when interpreting Culture Index profiles. Avoiding these errors is as important as understanding the methodology itself.
+
+</overview>
+
+<interpretation_mistakes>
+
+<mistake name="comparing-absolutes">
+
+**Comparing absolute trait values between people**
+
+**Wrong:** "Dan has higher autonomy than Jim because his A is 8 vs 5"
+
+**Right:** "Dan is +3 centiles from his arrow; Jim is +1 from his arrow"
+
+**Why it's wrong:** The arrow position varies between surveys based on EU. An 8 with an arrow at 6 is only +2 from norm. A 5 with an arrow at 2 is +3 from norm.
+
+**Only exception:** L and I use absolute values and CAN be compared directly.
+
+</mistake>
+
+<mistake name="ignoring-arrow">
+
+**Ignoring the red arrow position**
+
+The arrow is the population mean (50th percentile). All interpretation must be relative to it.
+
+**Wrong:** "This person has low B (score of 3)"
+
+**Right:** "This person's B is 2 centiles left of their arrow, indicating pronounced introversion"
+
+</mistake>
+
+<mistake name="value-judgments">
+
+**Treating traits as "good" or "bad"**
+
+Culture Index measures behavioral traits, not value or capability.
+
+**Wrong:**
+- "High D is good because they're detail-oriented"
+- "Low B is bad because they're not social"
+
+**Right:**
+- "High D indicates strong attention to detail - fits roles requiring precision"
+- "Low B indicates preference for focused work - fits analytical roles"
+
+There is no universally "good" profile. Fit depends on role, team, and context.
+
+</mistake>
+
+<mistake name="stale-data">
+
+**Using outdated data (18+ months old)**
+
+Job behaviors update as environment, leadership, or projects change. Stale data leads to wrong conclusions.
+
+**Best practice:** Resurvey job behaviors every 6 months, especially after major role or leadership changes.
+
+</mistake>
+
+<mistake name="single-trait-focus">
+
+**Over-indexing on a single trait**
+
+The pattern (relationship between traits) matters more than any individual dot.
+
+**Wrong:** "They have High A, so they're a leader"
+
+**Right:** "High A combined with High D suggests they can build new systems. High A with Low D suggests they'll drive fast but may miss details."
+
+</mistake>
+
+<mistake name="ignoring-survey-vs-job">
+
+**Not comparing Survey vs Job graphs**
+
+Missing burnout signals by only looking at one graph.
+
+**Always check:**
+- Did the arrow move? (Stress/Frustration signal)
+- Did any dots flip sides? (Polarizing shift - flight risk)
+- What's the EU utilization? (>130% stress, <70% frustration)
+
+</mistake>
+
+<mistake name="confusing-traits-behaviors">
+
+**Confusing traits with behaviors**
+
+Survey (top) = hardwired traits (who you ARE)
+Job (bottom) = adaptive behaviors (who you're TRYING TO BE)
+
+Traits don't change. Behaviors can be modified temporarily - but at an energy cost.
+
+**"You can't send a duck to Eagle school."** - You can train behaviors, not traits.
+
+</mistake>
+
+</interpretation_mistakes>
+
+<application_mistakes>
+
+<mistake name="seeking-homogeneity">
+
+**Hiring for homogeneous teams**
+
+Hiring people who match the manager's profile creates blind spots.
+
+**Better approach:** Build diverse teams with complementary traits. Every team needs Gas (High A), Brake (High D), and Glue (High B) in appropriate proportions.
+
+</mistake>
+
+<mistake name="overloading-high-a">
+
+**Overloading on High A's**
+
+High A's are "the single hardest trait to employ." They work for "me, Inc." first.
+
+Too many High A's = power struggles, lack of follow-through, no one to execute.
+
+**You are only RENTING High A's** - they need a mutually beneficial partnership.
+
+</mistake>
+
+<mistake name="neglecting-brake">
+
+**Neglecting the Brake (High D)**
+
+Every team needs quality control, risk management, and follow-through.
+
+Without Brake: Erosion, mistakes, lawsuits, quality issues, things start but never finish.
+
+</mistake>
+
+<mistake name="assuming-fit-permanent">
+
+**Assuming job fit is permanent**
+
+People's roles evolve. Business needs change. What fit yesterday may not fit tomorrow.
+
+Regular check-ins (resurvey every 6 months) catch misalignment before it becomes burnout or turnover.
+
+</mistake>
+
+<mistake name="using-ci-alone">
+
+**Using Culture Index as the only data point**
+
+Culture Index is ONE tool among many. It measures behavioral traits, not:
+- Skills or competencies
+- Intelligence
+- Experience
+- Values
+- Motivation
+
+**Best practice:** Use CI alongside interviews, references, skills assessments, and performance data.
+
+</mistake>
+
+</application_mistakes>
+
+<communication_mistakes>
+
+<mistake name="sharing-raw-scores">
+
+**Sharing raw scores without context**
+
+Telling someone "Your A is 8" without explaining relative position is meaningless and potentially harmful.
+
+**Always communicate:**
+- Position relative to arrow
+- What that means behaviorally
+- Why it's neither good nor bad
+- How it fits (or doesn't) with their role
+
+</mistake>
+
+<mistake name="labeling-people">
+
+**Using CI to label or box people**
+
+CI shows tendencies, not destiny.
+
+**Wrong:** "You're a Persuader, so you should only do sales"
+
+**Right:** "Your pattern shows strengths in influence and relationship building. How do you use those in your current role?"
+
+</mistake>
+
+<mistake name="public-comparison">
+
+**Comparing profiles publicly**
+
+Never compare individuals' profiles in group settings without their consent.
+
+Discussing "Person A is more detail-oriented than Person B" creates hierarchy and judgment.
+
+</mistake>
+
+</communication_mistakes>
+
+<red_flags>
+
+**Signals that suggest deeper investigation:**
+
+| Signal | What to Check |
+|--------|---------------|
+| EU 0-10 (avoidant response) | Was survey completed properly? Trust issues? |
+| All dots on or near arrow | Chameleon pattern - less than 0.57% of population. Verify validity. |
+| Job behaviors completely opposite of Survey | Imminent flight risk. What's causing this extreme modification? |
+| EU utilization > 150% | Severe stress. Immediate conversation needed. |
+| EU utilization < 50% | Severe disengagement. May have already mentally quit. |
+| D raised significantly in Job behaviors | Most common unsustainable stress pattern. Why do they feel they need to be so much more perfectionist? |
+
+</red_flags>
+
+<checklist>
+
+**Before finalizing any interpretation:**
+
+- [ ] Did I use relative positions (distance from arrow)?
+- [ ] Did I avoid calling any trait "good" or "bad"?
+- [ ] Did I compare Survey vs Job if both available?
+- [ ] Did I calculate EU utilization?
+- [ ] Did I consider the full pattern, not just leading traits?
+- [ ] Is my data current (less than 18 months old)?
+- [ ] Did I note that CI is one data point among many?
+
+</checklist>
+
+<rationalization_table>
+
+**Common excuses that indicate you're about to make a CI interpretation mistake:**
+
+| Excuse | Reality |
+|--------|---------|
+| "Their A is higher so they're more autonomous" | Compare distance from arrow, not absolute values |
+| "This is a bad profile for leadership" | No bad profiles - fit depends on role and context |
+| "They need to change their C trait" | Survey traits are hardwired - change the environment instead |
+| "Low B means they're not a team player" | Low B means they prefer focused work - they can still collaborate |
+| "High D is always good for quality" | High D without other traits can mean paralysis and rigidity |
+| "They should be more like their manager" | Different profiles bring complementary strengths |
+| "This pattern can't do that job" | Patterns indicate tendencies, not hard limits |
+| "Their EU is fine, the job is the problem" | EU tells you about energy, not about job design |
+| "I remember their profile from last year" | Resurvey Job behaviors every 6 months - they change |
+| "The arrow doesn't matter, just look at the dots" | The arrow IS the reference point - dots mean nothing without it |
+| "L and I work the same as A, B, C, D" | L and I use absolute values, primary traits are relative |
+| "Survey and Job will be the same" | Survey = hardwired, Job = adaptive. They often differ. |
+| "High A means they're selfish" | High A means they're self-directed - not the same thing |
+| "We need all High A's on this high-growth team" | You're renting High A's, and they'll clash with each other |
+| "This hire looks good, skip the CI" | CI is one data point - use it WITH other assessments, not instead of |
+
+</rationalization_table>