# Screening Rubric Builder

> Turn a job description into a weighted, anchored rubric for the pre-interview resume/CV screen so applicants are filtered against the same job-relevant criteria, in writing, before opinions form. Use when you have a JD and an applicant pile and need to decide who advances to interviews, set up a fair resume screen, or replace gut-feel resume sorting with a defensible filter. Do NOT use when building the interview-loop scorecard interviewers fill in during or after interviews - use hiring-scorecard instead.

- Skill: `skillmedev/screening-rubric-builder` (Agent Skill)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add skillmedev/screening-rubric-builder`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/skillmedev/screening-rubric-builder/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Coding & Dev Tools
- Author: SkillMedev (https://skillmd.com/u/skillmedev)
- Updated: 2026-09-17
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/skillmedev/screening-rubric-builder

---


# Screening Rubric Builder

Convert a JD into a screening rubric specific enough that two reviewers reading the same resume reach similar advance/reject decisions. This is the pre-interview stage only: it decides who gets an interview, not how interviews are scored.

## Workflow

1. **Derive 5-8 screenable competencies from the JD.** Extract them from the role's outcomes and must-haves. Each must be observable from an application (resume, cover letter, portfolio, work samples) and job-relevant - "ships schemas that survive scale," not "smart." Drop anything you cannot tie to a stated JD requirement. Never use "culture fit"; if culture matters, decompose it into named, assessable behaviors.
2. **Weight each competency by impact on success.** Assign weights summing to 100% that reflect how much each predicts performance in this specific role. Core role skills outweigh nice-to-haves. Write a one-line rationale per weight so it is defensible across the whole applicant slate. Never weight a proxy for a protected trait.
3. **Write an anchored scale.** Use a 1-4 scale with written behavioral anchors per competency: what a 1 application shows, what a 4 shows, with concrete evidence examples drawn from what is visible in an application. Anchors are what turn a vibe into a rating.
4. **Require an evidence note per score.** For every score the reviewer must cite the specific line, project, or artifact in the application that justifies it. No cited evidence, no score.
5. **Set the advance rule up front.** Define the weighted threshold to advance to interviews before reviewing any applicant, plus minimum scores on each must-have competency. Pre-committing the bar prevents post-hoc rationalization. A low total with one standout area is a reviewer conversation, not an automatic pass or reject.
6. **Apply the rubric identically to every applicant** for the role, and keep the scored records for consistency review.

## Quality Bar

- Every competency traces to a specific JD requirement and is judgeable from the application alone.
- Weights sum to 100% and each carries a written rationale.
- Each competency has anchors for both ends of the scale, not just a label.
- The advance threshold and per-must-have minimums are written before the first applicant is read.
- A second reviewer scoring the same application from the same rubric lands within one point.

## Do NOT

- Do NOT score the interview loop or design interviewer scorecards - that is hiring-scorecard's job; stop at the advance/reject decision.
- Do NOT auto-advance or auto-reject anyone; the rubric assists human judgment, it does not replace it.
- Do NOT include or infer age, gender, race, disability, family status, or background, or any proxy for them.
- Do NOT assess the same competency in both the screen and a later interview stage with no plan - measure it once, in the stage where it is most visible.
- Do NOT keep any competency you cannot defend as job-related; flag and cut it.