Commencer
Hiring Panel — 3-Lens Hiring Review

Hiring Panel — 3-Lens Hiring Review

Three independent AI reviewers audit a hiring decision for unverified skills, ignored red flags, and culture or cash-flow mismatch, then cross-examine each other.
#Recherche
Note
Davantage d’évaluations nécessaires
Vendus
0
Mode d’utilisation
Télécharger

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.