
Hiring Panel — 3-Lens Hiring Review
How it works
Hiring Panel reviews a hiring decision in three phases instead of one polite pass:
Phase 1 — Three independent reviewers, blind. Skills Verifier, Red-Flag Hunter, and Culture & Cash-Flow Realist each read the same draft without seeing each other's notes.
Phase 2 — Cross-examination. Every finding is challenged or corroborated by the other two lenses. False positives get contested with a concrete reason; issues flagged independently by more than one lens become stronger signals.
Phase 3 — Board verdict. Each finding is tagged CONFIRMED / CORROBORATED / DISPUTED, followed by one recommendation line you can act on.
Sample output
## Phase 3 — Board verdict
1. **[CORROBORATED]** Example finding flagged independently by two lenses — fix: one concrete rewrite.
2. **[DISPUTED]** Example finding with a lens challenge shown side by side — your call.
**Recommendation:** Fix first — 1 CORROBORATED finding (unverified skill claim), verify it before extending the offer.
Use cases
- Get a rigorous second opinion on a candidate before you extend an offer
- Catch the failure modes a single-pass AI review tends to soften: skills that look right on paper but were never verified, red flags explained away, and culture/cash-flow mismatches nobody named
- Works inside Claude Code, Codex, or OpenClaw — paste a first hire and go
FAQ
Does it replace reference checks? No — it flags what to verify; you still run the checks.
What are the limits? The AI reviews your notes only; it is not a background check or employment-law advice.
What about sensitive info? Redact candidate names and personal data before pasting. The Skill does not fetch or store your text anywhere on its own.