People Ops

This is an OMH people-ops workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).

Why This Exists

people-ops keeps recruiting and people-process guidance fair, structured, and evidence bounded before any human decision or external HR action.

Do Not Use When

• The request asks for a jurisdiction-specific employment-law conclusion, policy compliance ruling, or contract interpretation; use legal-compliance-review.
• The user only needs a one-off job-ad, rejection, or interview-email rewrite; use content-operator.
• The user asks to create ATS records, send invitations, book interviews, change employment status, or modify HRIS settings; use connector-operator with explicit authorization and observed results.
• The prompt asks the workflow to make an unsupported candidate decision from protected characteristics or missing interview evidence; retain the process and evidence gap instead.

Examples

Good example:

• Prompt: Create an interview scorecard and debrief plan for our first senior support hire.
• Expected behavior: Prepare role criteria, a structured scorecard, a debrief template, and decision-owner plan.
• Why: The request needs a fair hiring-process brief, not a claim that a candidate was evaluated or hired.

Bad example:

• Prompt: Send calendar invitations to every candidate for next Tuesday.
• Expected behavior: Route to connector-operator, not people-ops.
• Why: Sending invitations is an explicit external calendar action.

Completion Checklist

• Confirm the workflow target, evidence boundary, and stop condition are named.
• Report which outputs are prepared, observed, blocked, or missing.
• Name the smallest next verification or handoff instead of claiming completion from narration.

Recovery Notes

• If required context is missing, ask one blocking question or route back to the narrower workflow.
• If runtime or wrapper evidence is unavailable, keep the status as not_observed and expose the next observable action.

Use When

Use when a team needs a role brief, hiring plan, interview rubric, candidate-debrief structure, onboarding outline, or people-process decision support.

Strong routing signals: `recruiting plan`, `hiring scorecard`, `interview scorecard`, `candidate debrief`, `채용 계획`, `면접 평가표`, `후보자 비교`

Catalog Metadata

Category: operations Phase: people-operations Quality tier: evidence-gated Reasoning demand: light

Quality bar:

• Distinguish role outcomes from proxy criteria and missing evidence.
• Keep inclusion, privacy, policy, and decision-owner gaps visible.

Required inputs:

• role or people-process outcome
• available evidence
• decision owner
• policy constraints

Expert clarification questions:

• role or people-process outcome
  • English: What role or people-process outcome should this work achieve?
  • Korean: 이 작업에서 어떤 역할 또는 인사 프로세스 결과를 달성해야 하나요?

Expected outputs:

• role/outcome and must-have versus trainable-criteria brief
• structured interview scorecard and evidence-based debrief template
• hiring-process, interviewer, and decision-owner plan
• inclusion, privacy, policy, and missing-evidence flags with a next route

Artifact expectations:

• prepared people-operations brief when a wrapper captures it

Safety rules:

• Keep protected characteristics and missing interview evidence out of unsupported candidate recommendations.
• Do not claim HRIS, ATS, outreach, interview, or employment-status actions occurred.

Runtime Evidence

Use the current host's own tools and subagent/task mechanism when available; otherwise run the same lanes sequentially or name the unavailable capability. A prepared plan, handoff, checklist, or skill installation is not execution, review, CI, merge-readiness, or merge evidence. Record actual tool results, or not_observed / not_available, in the record; never invent dispatch or host accounting. Treat supplied context as advisory, not proof of hidden memory reads or writes. State scope, constraints, verification, and the stop condition before work. Reply in the user's own words and the host's own voice: the host's persona owns reply language, tone, speech level, and sentence endings, progress updates included (where it sets no language, use the one the user wrote in), and OMH shapes structure and content only; OMH's record terms (surface, lane, wrapper, handoff, evidence boundary, not_observed) stay in records and tool calls, never in the sentence the user reads unless they ask about one; and when a stop condition or a decision the user owns ends the turn, offer the next action as a question rather than declaring what will not be done. Supporting paths are relative to this skill directory; sibling skill paths are relative to its parent. Resolve them from the host-provided skill base directory ({baseDir} on hosts that provide it), never a hardcoded install location. A named workflow not installed here is unavailable, not permission to emulate its host-specific capabilities. Verify through the real surface before done.