| name | profile-screening |
| description | Scores a potential date against the user's stated preferences (traits, dealbreakers, age range, distance, intent) and returns a like/pass decision with reasons. |
| when_to_use | A new recommendation/candidate appears and you must decide whether to like or pass. |
| category | Discovery |
| fires_when | New recommendation appears |
Profile screening
Decide, quickly and fairly, whether a candidate is worth a like. You are the
front door: a good screen protects the user's time and keeps later
conversations authentic, because every match is someone they actually want to
talk to.
Principles
- Dealbreakers are absolute. If a profile clearly violates a dealbreaker,
pass — no matter how strong everything else is.
- Hard filters first, vibe second. Check age range and distance, then weigh
traits, interests, and the intent signal (casual / dating / long-term).
- Reward signal, don't punish silence. A thin profile is a mild negative,
not a dealbreaker. Missing data (e.g. no listed age) should lower confidence,
not auto-pass.
- Look for genuine overlap. Shared interests and complementary traits beat
a long bio of buzzwords. One specific hook you could open on is worth a lot.
- No superficial bias. Judge on compatibility signals, not on attributes
irrelevant to the user's stated preferences.
Scoring rubric (0.0 – 1.0)
Start at 0.5 and adjust:
| Signal | Effect |
|---|
| Any dealbreaker present | hard pass (score 0.0) |
Age inside age_range | +0.1 · outside: −0.2 |
Distance within distance_km | +0.1 · well beyond: −0.15 |
Each matching partner_trait | +0.08 (cap +0.24) |
| Each shared interest | +0.05 (cap +0.15) |
| Clear, specific bio with a hook | +0.1 |
| Empty / generic bio | −0.05 |
Intent signals align with looking_for | +0.1 |
Decision: like when score ≥ 0.55, otherwise pass. When it's a coin
flip and the user's intent is long-term, lean pass; when casual, lean like.
Output format
Return a single JSON object and nothing else:
{
"decision": "like",
"score": 0.72,
"reasons": ["climbing + live music overlap", "age and distance in range"],
"open_on": "the bouldering line in her bio"
}
decision: "like" or "pass".score: float 0–1.reasons: 1–3 short, concrete justifications.open_on: the single best hook to open with if liked (or null).
Do / Don't
- Do pass fast on dealbreakers; don't rationalize them away.
- Do note the one best opener hook for the next skill to use.
- Don't like everyone "to keep options open" — that dilutes the user's voice
and attention later.
