Windsurf + Aider targets, MCP server, and demo placement (#33)

Broadens both reach (more tools) and content types (an MCP server), continuing
the multi-platform story.

Windsurf + Aider:
- build-exports.mjs gains two platforms: exports/windsurf/*.md (workspace rules,
  trigger: model_decision) and exports/aider/*.md (conventions for `aider --read`).
  Now 5 platforms (ChatGPT, Gemini, Cursor, Windsurf, Aider).
- install.sh + bin/cli.mjs install both (windsurf -> .windsurf/rules, aider ->
  .aider/skills with a --read hint); generated README index is excluded from copies.
- One-line windsurf-install.sh / aider-install.sh wrappers for parity.

MCP server (new content type):
- mcp/server.mjs — zero-dependency stdio MCP server exposing list_skills,
  search_skills, get_skill. Published as a second bin (pm-claude-skills-mcp).
  Logs to stderr; reads bundled skills/ at startup. mcp/README.md documents
  client config.

Also: README hero "See it in action" demo placement (ready to swap in a GIF;
recording guide in web/docs-assets/README.md), Works-With table + exports +
install docs updated, CHANGELOG Unreleased. package.json files/bin updated.


Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_016JWn5jRD5tcEFKrubjQ6Px

Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>

exports/aider/pm-people/hiring-rubric/hiring-rubric.md

@@ -0,0 +1,130 @@
+# Hiring Rubric Skill
+
+This skill generates a complete structured interview scorecard and guide for any role. It reduces hiring bias, enables consistent evaluation across interviewers, and produces better hiring decisions.
+
+## Required Inputs
+
+Ask the user for these if not provided:
+- **Role title and level** (e.g. Senior Product Manager, Junior Data Analyst)
+- **Team or function** (e.g. Growth, Platform, Customer Success)
+- **Top 3–5 things this person needs to do well** (the actual job requirements, not just the JD)
+- **Interview format** (number of rounds, length of each)
+- **Any known gaps or risks to probe for** (optional)
+- **Company values or competencies** (optional — if provided, include as a competency section)
+
+## Output Structure
+
+---
+
+# Interview Scorecard: [Role Title]
+**Level:** [Junior / Mid / Senior / Staff / Manager]
+**Team:** [Team name]
+**Created:** [Date]
+
+---
+
+## Scorecard Overview
+
+Each competency is scored 1–4:
+- **4 — Strong Yes:** Clear evidence of exceptional ability. Hire signal.
+- **3 — Yes:** Solid evidence. Meets the bar for this role.
+- **2 — Lean No:** Some evidence but gaps that matter for this role.
+- **1 — No:** Little to no evidence. Clear miss.
+
+**Hiring recommendation:**
+- 3+ competencies at 4, rest at 3 = Strong hire
+- Majority at 3, no 1s = Hire
+- Any 1s or majority 2s = No hire (unless specific mitigating factors)
+
+---
+
+## Competencies & Scoring
+
+For each competency (generate 4–6 based on the role):
+
+### Competency [N]: [Name — e.g. "Problem Structuring" / "Stakeholder Influence" / "Technical Depth"]
+
+**Why this matters for this role:** [One sentence — connects to actual job requirements]
+
+**What 4 looks like (Strong Yes):**
+[Specific, observable behaviours. "Proactively decomposed an ambiguous problem into a structured approach without prompting. Could articulate tradeoffs clearly and made assumptions explicit."]
+
+**What 2 looks like (Lean No):**
+[Specific, observable behaviours at the lower end. "Could answer direct questions but struggled when the interviewer removed scaffolding. Required significant prompting to reach a structured answer."]
+
+**Interview Questions (2–3 per competency):**
+
+1. *[Behavioural STAR question — e.g. "Tell me about a time you had to make a decision with incomplete data."]*
+   - **Good answer signals:** [What a strong answer includes]
+   - **Weak answer signals:** [What a weak or scripted answer looks like]
+   - **Follow-up probe:** [One follow-up to push deeper]
+
+2. *[Situational or hypothetical question for this role]*
+   - **Good answer signals:**
+   - **Follow-up probe:**
+
+---
+
+## Role-Specific Technical Assessment (if applicable)
+
+[If the role requires a technical screen, describe:]
+- **Format:** [Take-home / Live coding / Case study / Portfolio review]
+- **Duration:** [Time]
+- **What you're assessing:** [Specific skills]
+- **Scoring guidance:** [What distinguishes a 4 from a 2 on the technical component]
+
+---
+
+## Culture & Values Assessment
+
+[2–3 values-based questions aligned to company values if provided, or general culture fit questions:]
+
+1. *[Question]*
+   - **What you're listening for:**
+
+---
+
+## Red Flags to Watch For
+
+[5–7 specific red flags relevant to this role and level:]
+- [e.g. "Speaks only about individual work — no mention of collaboration or team impact"]
+- [e.g. "Can't give a specific example — pivots to hypotheticals when asked for real situations"]
+- [e.g. "For senior roles: no evidence of influencing without authority"]
+
+---
+
+## Interview Panel Guide
+
+Suggest how to divide competencies across interview rounds to avoid repetition:
+
+| Round | Interviewer | Competencies to Assess |
+|---|---|---|
+| 1 — Recruiter Screen | Recruiter | Motivation, career narrative, basics |
+| 2 — Hiring Manager | [Role] | [Assign 2 competencies] |
+| 3 — Peer Interview | [Role] | [Assign 2 competencies] |
+| 4 — Stakeholder | [Role] | [Assign 1–2 competencies + culture] |
+
+---
+
+## Quality Checks
+
+- [ ] Scoring descriptions are observable (behaviours, not adjectives)
+- [ ] 4 vs 2 distinction is clear and specific
+- [ ] Questions have follow-up probes
+- [ ] Red flags are specific to this role and level
+- [ ] Panel guide avoids competency overlap between rounds
+
+## Anti-Patterns
+
+- [ ] Do not include competencies that overlap significantly — each dimension must assess a distinct quality
+- [ ] Do not write behavioural questions that can be answered with a yes/no — use "Tell me about a time..." format
+- [ ] Do not set a scoring bar without calibration guidance — "above bar" means nothing without concrete examples at each level
+- [ ] Do not create a rubric with more than 6 competencies — panel interviews cannot reliably assess more
+- [ ] Do not omit a "must-have vs. nice-to-have" distinction in the requirements — all criteria cannot carry equal weight
+
+## Example Trigger Phrases
+
+- "Create a hiring rubric for a [role]"
+- "Build an interview scorecard for [job title]"
+- "Give me structured interview questions for a [level] [role]"
+- "We're hiring a [role] — help me build an assessment framework"