@elizaos/skills 2.0.0-alpha.3

package/skills/security-culture-index/skills/interpreting-culture-index/workflows/detect-burnout.md

@@ -0,0 +1,206 @@
+<required_reading>
+
+**Read these reference files before analyzing:**
+1. `references/primary-traits.md` - Understanding trait movement
+2. `references/anti-patterns.md` - Burnout warning signs
+
+</required_reading>
+
+<process>
+
+**Step 1: Load Both Charts**
+
+You need both Survey (top) and Job (bottom) graphs for burnout detection.
+
+Record for each chart:
+- Arrow position
+- All trait values (A, B, C, D, L, I)
+- EU value
+
+**Step 2: Calculate Energy Utilization**
+
+```
+Utilization = (Job EU / Survey EU) × 100
+```
+
+| Utilization | Status | Interpretation |
+|-------------|--------|----------------|
+| 70-130% | Healthy | Sustainable workload |
+| >130% | **STRESS** | Overutilization, burnout risk |
+| <70% | **FRUSTRATION** | Underutilization, flight risk |
+
+**Example**: Survey EU = 41, Job EU = 54 → 54/41 = 132% → STRESS
+
+**Step 3: Compare Arrow Movement**
+
+| Arrow Direction (Survey → Job) | Signal | Meaning |
+|--------------------------------|--------|---------|
+| Arrow shifts RIGHT | STRESS | Pushing harder than natural |
+| Arrow shifts LEFT | FRUSTRATION | Pulling back, disengaging |
+| Arrow position unchanged | Stable | Environment matches expectations |
+
+**Step 4: Analyze Each Trait's Movement**
+
+For each trait, compare Survey position to Job position:
+
+| Trait | Survey | Job | Movement | Signal |
+|-------|--------|-----|----------|--------|
+| A | ? | ? | +/- ? | ? |
+| B | ? | ? | +/- ? | ? |
+| C | ? | ? | +/- ? | ? |
+| D | ? | ? | +/- ? | ? |
+| L | ? | ? | +/- ? | ? |
+| I | ? | ? | +/- ? | ? |
+
+**Movement interpretation:**
+
+| Trait | Raising | Dropping |
+|-------|---------|----------|
+| A | Needs to drive/lead more (may be self-induced or required) | Being held back ("Who/what is blocking you?") |
+| B | Role requires more relationship building | Role isolates them (demotivating if naturally high B) |
+| C | More focus/patience required than comfortable | More urgency/variety required than comfortable |
+| D | Expected to be more perfectionist/accountable | Role allows more flexibility |
+| L | Trying to be more emotional/open | Compartmentalizing emotions at work |
+| I | Trying to be more inventive (traditional approach not working) | Focusing on practical execution |
+
+**Step 5: Identify Polarizing Shifts**
+
+**Critical flag**: When a dot moves from one side of the norm to the other.
+
+Example: D moves from 2nd percentile (left) to 91st percentile (right)
+- This is drastic behavior modification
+- Almost certainly not sustainable
+
+Document any polarizing shifts:
+- [Trait]: Moved from [side] to [opposite side]
+- Severity: [moderate/severe]
+
+**Step 6: Check for "Opposite Pattern" Warning**
+
+**Imminent flight risk signal**: When someone's Job behaviors show the opposite of their Survey traits.
+
+Example: Architect (High A, Low C, Low D) → Socializer (Low A, High B, High C) in job
+- All dots flipped to opposite side
+- This person is in severe stress
+- Something must change or they will leave
+
+**Step 7: Identify Stress Sources**
+
+Job behaviors reflect perception of what the role requires. Sources:
+1. **Their leader** - Manager expectations/communication
+2. **The work itself** - Actual responsibilities
+3. **Coworkers** - People they work with
+
+Ask: "Why do they perceive they need to behave this way?"
+
+**Step 8: Calculate 3-6 Month Risk**
+
+If behavior modification continues 3-6+ months, expect:
+- Burnout and stress
+- Disengagement
+- Low morale
+- "Mailing it in" (70% effort when capable of 100%)
+
+Assess: How long has this modification been sustained?
+
+**Step 9: Check D Trait Specifically**
+
+D movement is the most common stress indicator:
+
+| D Movement | Signal |
+|------------|--------|
+| Raising D significantly | Expected to be more perfectionist/accountable than natural |
+| D "polarizing" (low to high) | Most common source of unsustainable stress |
+
+**Step 10: Compile Burnout Assessment**
+
+```
+## Burnout Risk Assessment: [Name]
+
+### Energy Utilization
+- Survey EU: [X]
+- Job EU: [X]
+- Utilization: [X]%
+- Status: [HEALTHY / STRESS / FRUSTRATION]
+
+### Arrow Movement
+- Survey arrow: [X]
+- Job arrow: [X]
+- Direction: [Right=Stress / Left=Frustration / Stable]
+
+### Trait Movement Summary
+| Trait | Survey | Job | Change | Concern Level |
+|-------|--------|-----|--------|---------------|
+| A | | | | Low/Medium/High |
+| B | | | | Low/Medium/High |
+| C | | | | Low/Medium/High |
+| D | | | | Low/Medium/High |
+
+### Polarizing Shifts
+- [Any traits that flipped sides]
+
+### Risk Level: [LOW / MODERATE / HIGH / CRITICAL]
+
+### Stress Sources (Likely)
+1. [Source 1]
+2. [Source 2]
+
+### Recommended Actions
+1. [Action 1 - e.g., "Discuss workload with manager"]
+2. [Action 2 - e.g., "Resurvey in 3 months"]
+3. [Action 3 - e.g., "Consider role adjustment"]
+
+### Timeline
+- Current duration estimate: [X months]
+- Risk horizon: [When burnout likely if unchanged]
+```
+
+</process>
+
+<stress_types>
+
+**>130% (STRESS) has two types:**
+
+1. **Good stress (self-induced)**: "I love this company, I care deeply"
+   - Still burnout risk if sustained
+   - Health issues possible after 3-6 months
+
+2. **Bad stress (overutilization)**: Too much work OR work requires too much behavior modification
+   - More urgent intervention needed
+   - May need workload or role adjustment
+
+**<70% (FRUSTRATION):**
+
+- Work doesn't fit their traits
+- May have lots to do, but work doesn't match who they are
+- Not punching eject yet, but getting close
+- Flight risk if not addressed
+
+</stress_types>
+
+<anti_patterns>
+
+Avoid these burnout detection mistakes:
+
+- **Ignoring small EU differences**: Even 10-15% over 130% matters
+- **Focusing only on EU**: Trait movement matters too
+- **Dismissing "good stress"**: Self-induced stress still causes burnout
+- **Using stale data**: Job behaviors should be resurveyed every 6 months
+- **Not asking why**: Understand the source before recommending solutions
+
+</anti_patterns>
+
+<success_criteria>
+
+Burnout detection is complete when:
+- [ ] Both Survey and Job data analyzed
+- [ ] EU utilization calculated
+- [ ] Arrow movement identified
+- [ ] All trait movements documented
+- [ ] Polarizing shifts flagged
+- [ ] Risk level assigned (Low/Moderate/High/Critical)
+- [ ] Stress sources identified
+- [ ] Specific recommendations provided
+- [ ] Timeline/horizon assessed
+
+</success_criteria>

package/skills/security-culture-index/skills/interpreting-culture-index/workflows/extract-from-pdf.md

@@ -0,0 +1,121 @@
+# Extract from PDF Workflow
+
+Extract Culture Index profile data from a PDF file and convert to JSON format.
+
+## Prerequisites
+
+**Required:**
+- `uv` - Install with `brew install uv` or `pip install uv`
+- `poppler` - Install with `brew install poppler` (macOS) or `apt install poppler-utils` (Ubuntu)
+- `tesseract` - Install with `brew install tesseract` (macOS) or `apt install tesseract-ocr` (Ubuntu)
+
+## Extraction Command
+
+Single command, no setup required:
+
+```bash
+uv run {baseDir}/scripts/extract_pdf.py --verify /path/to/profile.pdf
+```
+
+**Options:**
+- `--verify`, `-v` - Show verification summary for spot-checking (recommended)
+- Second argument - Output path for JSON (optional, defaults to stdout)
+
+**Examples:**
+```bash
+# Extract with verification (recommended)
+uv run {baseDir}/scripts/extract_pdf.py --verify profile.pdf
+
+# Extract and save to file
+uv run {baseDir}/scripts/extract_pdf.py profile.pdf output.json
+
+# Extract and pipe to jq
+uv run {baseDir}/scripts/extract_pdf.py profile.pdf | jq '.survey'
+```
+
+## What Happens
+
+1. `uv` creates a temporary environment with all Python dependencies (PEP 723)
+2. Script extracts trait values using OpenCV (100% accuracy)
+3. With `--verify`, displays summary table for manual confirmation
+4. Outputs JSON to stdout or specified file
+
+## Verification Summary
+
+When using `--verify`, you'll see ASCII charts that match the PDF layout:
+
+```
+============================================================
+VERIFICATION SUMMARY - Compare with PDF
+============================================================
+Name: Sara Davis
+Pattern: Specialist
+
+Survey Traits (EU=18)
+        0   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9  10
+    A       ●                                       [1]
+    B       ●                                       [1]
+    C       ●                                       [1]
+    D           ●                                   [2]
+    L                                   ●           [8]
+    I       ●                                       [1]
+            ↑                                       arrow (1.3)
+
+Job Behaviors (EU=26)
+        0   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9  10
+    A       ●                                       [1]
+    B           ●                                   [2]
+    C                   ●                           [4]
+    D                       ●                       [5]
+    L               ●                               [3]
+    I                   ●                           [4]
+                    ↑                               arrow (3.0)
+
+Energy Utilization: 144% (⚠️ STRESS)
+============================================================
+```
+
+**Spot-check against the PDF:**
+- Each trait row: Is the ● in roughly the same position as the dot on the PDF?
+- Arrow position: Does ↑ align with the red arrow on each chart?
+- EU values: Match what's displayed on the PDF?
+
+## If Extraction Fails
+
+- **"uv not found"** → Install uv: `brew install uv`
+- **"poppler not found"** → Install poppler: `brew install poppler`
+- **"tesseract not found"** → Install tesseract: `brew install tesseract`
+
+**Do NOT fall back to visual estimation.** Fix the dependency issue instead. Visual estimation has 20-30% error rate.
+
+## Output Format
+
+```json
+{
+  "name": "Person Name",
+  "archetype": "Architect",
+  "header": { ... },
+  "survey": {
+    "eu": 21,
+    "arrow": 2.3,
+    "a": [5, 2.7],      // [absolute, relative_to_arrow]
+    "b": [0, -2.3],
+    "c": [1, -1.3],
+    "d": [3, 0.7],
+    "logic": [5, null],
+    "ingenuity": [2, null]
+  },
+  "job": { ... },
+  "analysis": {
+    "energy_utilization": 148,
+    "status": "stress"
+  }
+}
+```
+
+## After Extraction
+
+Proceed to the appropriate workflow:
+- Individual interpretation: `workflows/interpret-individual.md`
+- Burnout detection: `workflows/detect-burnout.md`
+- Team analysis: `workflows/analyze-team.md`

package/skills/security-culture-index/skills/interpreting-culture-index/workflows/interpret-individual.md

@@ -0,0 +1,183 @@
+<required_reading>
+
+**Read these reference files before interpreting:**
+1. `references/primary-traits.md` - A, B, C, D trait details
+2. `references/secondary-traits.md` - EU, L, I traits
+3. `references/patterns-archetypes.md` - Pattern identification
+
+</required_reading>
+
+<process>
+
+**Step 1: Load the Profile**
+
+For JSON:
+```python
+import json
+with open("path/to/profile.json") as f:
+    profile = json.load(f)
+```
+
+For PDF: **Extract first** using the extraction script:
+```bash
+uv run {baseDir}/scripts/extract_pdf.py --verify /path/to/profile.pdf
+```
+
+⚠️ **NEVER use visual estimation for trait values.** Visual estimation has 20-30% error rate.
+
+**Step 1b: Verify Extraction (if from PDF)**
+
+After extraction, review the verification summary and briefly spot-check against the PDF image:
+- [ ] EU values match what's displayed on each chart
+- [ ] Arrow position looks correct
+- [ ] Most extreme trait (shown in summary) makes visual sense
+
+If any value seems wrong, re-run extraction or report the discrepancy.
+
+**Step 2: Identify Arrow Position**
+
+The red vertical arrow is the population mean (50th percentile). Record its position on the 0-10 scale for both Survey and Job charts.
+
+**Step 3: Calculate Trait Distances**
+
+For each trait (A, B, C, D), calculate distance from arrow:
+
+| Trait | Absolute Value | Arrow | Distance | Interpretation |
+|-------|---------------|-------|----------|----------------|
+| A | ? | ? | ? | (will fill) |
+| B | ? | ? | ? | |
+| C | ? | ? | ? | |
+| D | ? | ? | ? | |
+
+**Distance interpretation:**
+- 0 to ±0.5: Normative (flexible)
+- ±1 to ±1.5: Tendency (moderate)
+- ±2 to ±3: Pronounced (noticeable)
+- ±4+: Extreme (compulsive)
+
+**Step 4: Identify Leading Dots**
+
+Find the dots farthest from the arrow. These drive behavior most strongly.
+
+Rank by distance (most extreme first):
+1. [Trait] at ±X centiles
+2. [Trait] at ±X centiles
+3. [Trait] at ±X centiles
+
+**Step 5: Identify Pattern/Archetype**
+
+Cross-reference with `references/patterns-archetypes.md`.
+
+Common patterns:
+- **Architect/Visionary**: High A, Low C, Low D
+- **Rainmaker/Persuader**: High A, High B, Low C
+- **Scholar/Specialist**: Low B, High C, High D
+- **Technical Expert**: Low A, Low B, Low C, High D
+- **Craftsman**: Low A, Low B, High C, High D
+
+**Step 6: Note L and I (Absolute Values)**
+
+These use absolute interpretation, not distance from arrow:
+
+| Trait | Score | Interpretation |
+|-------|-------|----------------|
+| Logic | 0-2: Low (emotional) | 3-7: Normative | 8-10: High (rational) |
+| Ingenuity | 0-2: Low (practical) | 3-6: Occasional | 7-10: High (inventive) |
+
+**Step 7: Summarize Strengths**
+
+Based on leading dots, identify 2-3 key strengths:
+
+For High A: Initiative, self-confidence, strategic thinking
+For High B: Relationship building, influence, verbal communication
+For High C: Patience, focus, consistency, methodical approach
+For High D: Precision, reliability, quality control, accountability
+For Low A: Team orientation, service mindset, execution
+For Low B: Focus, analytical depth, independence
+For Low C: Urgency, multitasking, adaptability
+For Low D: Flexibility, big-picture thinking, risk tolerance
+
+**Step 8: Identify Challenges**
+
+Based on leading dots, note 2-3 potential challenges:
+
+For High A: Difficulty with people, impatience with others, "me first" tendency
+For High B: May prioritize relationships over results, needs social interaction
+For High C: May resist change, slow to pivot, needs advance notice
+For High D: May be inflexible, perfectionist, struggle to delegate
+For Low A: May lack initiative, need clear direction, conflict avoidant
+For Low B: May seem cold or disengaged, prefers solitude
+For Low C: May create unnecessary urgency, interrupt others, prone to errors
+For Low D: May miss details, inconsistent follow-through, forgetful
+
+**Step 9: Check Survey vs Job**
+
+If both graphs available, compare:
+- Which dots moved significantly?
+- Did arrow shift (stress/frustration signal)?
+- Calculate EU utilization: (Job EU / Survey EU) × 100
+
+**Step 10: Compile Summary**
+
+Structure your interpretation:
+
+```
+## [Name] - [Archetype]
+
+### Key Traits
+- [Leading trait 1]: [interpretation]
+- [Leading trait 2]: [interpretation]
+- [Leading trait 3]: [interpretation]
+
+### Strengths
+1. [Strength 1]
+2. [Strength 2]
+3. [Strength 3]
+
+### Development Areas
+1. [Challenge 1]
+2. [Challenge 2]
+
+### Energy Status
+- Survey EU: [X]
+- Job EU: [X]
+- Utilization: [X]% ([healthy/stress/frustration])
+
+### Recommendations
+- [Actionable recommendation 1]
+- [Actionable recommendation 2]
+```
+
+</process>
+
+<anti_patterns>
+
+Avoid these interpretation mistakes:
+
+- **Stating absolute values without context**: Never say "A is 8" without relating to arrow
+- **Comparing between people using absolutes**: "Person A has higher B than Person B"
+- **Value judgments**: Calling traits "good" or "bad"
+- **Over-indexing on single traits**: The pattern matters more than individual dots
+- **Ignoring Survey vs Job comparison**: Missing burnout signals
+- **Treating as definitive**: Culture Index is one data point, not complete truth
+
+</anti_patterns>
+
+<success_criteria>
+
+Individual interpretation is complete when:
+- [ ] Data extracted using script (NOT visual estimation) if from PDF
+- [ ] Verification summary spot-checked against PDF (if from PDF)
+- [ ] Arrow position identified for both charts (if available)
+- [ ] All trait distances calculated relative to arrow
+- [ ] Leading dots identified and ranked
+- [ ] Pattern/archetype named
+- [ ] L and I interpreted using absolute values
+- [ ] 2-3 strengths documented
+- [ ] 2-3 challenges documented
+- [ ] Survey vs Job compared (if available)
+- [ ] EU utilization calculated (if both charts available)
+- [ ] Actionable recommendations provided
+- [ ] No absolute value comparisons used
+
+</success_criteria>