People management and hiring

Free Interview Scorecard Generator.

Consistent evidence-based assessment rubric.

Build a scorecard from the role and interview tasks and keep ratings tied to observable evidence.

Chrome extension + account required.
25 free automation tasks/month across tools. Browser-provider limits apply.

WHAT TO HAVE READY

Role competencies and selection criteria.

YOUR STARTING POINT

A task you can make yours.

Copy it here. Paste it into WebAct when you are ready.

This page prepares your prompt. The task runs in WebAct.

01

Make the task yours.

Review the prompt above. Add your goal and any requirements that matter.

02

Bring it to WebAct.

Open WebAct, paste the task and provide your source material. Start in Chat for a draft or explanation; use Task when you want an approved browser action or file.

03

Check the useful part.

Use the result as an editable draft or analysis. Check it against the supplied facts and your intended audience before relying on it or sharing it.

A PRACTICAL GUIDE

How to use the Interview Scorecard Generator.

Interview scorecards should use role-related criteria and observable evidence. Avoid vague culture-fit ratings or criteria introduced after meeting a candidate.

Make the workflow fit your task.

Translate role requirements into observable interview criteria and anchored ratings. Decide what evidence each exercise can reveal before meeting candidates, leaving room to mark criteria that were not assessed.

What you provide
Role competencies and selection criteria.
What you get
Consistent evidence-based assessment rubric.

See the input and the result.

Illustrative input and output · a teaching example, not a live WebAct run

Example input

Create two interview criteria for a reporting role: data-quality investigation and written explanation. Use three rating anchors and an unassessed option; do not evaluate a real candidate.

Completed example

Data-quality investigation:
1 — identifies a symptom without testing its cause.
2 — proposes relevant checks and follows evidence.
3 — tests alternatives, explains limits and verifies the finding.

Written explanation:
1 — conclusion or next step is unclear.
2 — explains the finding and action in understandable terms.
3 — adapts the explanation to the audience and preserves evidence and uncertainty.

Use unassessed when the interview did not produce relevant evidence; record examples beside each rating.
Download this example

Load this input into the prompt, then copy it to WebAct to try the task. Your result may differ from the illustration.

Decisions and troubleshooting.

Should interviewers add new criteria after meeting a candidate?

Use agreed role-related criteria consistently. New requirements should be reviewed through the hiring process rather than introduced as retrospective preferences.

Why do interviewers assign different ratings to the same answer?

Compare the rating anchors and recorded evidence. Clarify what demonstrates each level before treating the difference as a candidate issue.

Try it with your own source.

Replace the example with your material in the task prompt. Keep the requirements you need, then copy the task into WebAct.

Customize and copy the task ↑
BEFORE YOU BEGIN

Using WebAct.

The prompt and example are available here. Run your task in the WebAct Chrome extension.

Is this tool free?

You can copy and edit the prompt here for free. To use it with WebAct, install the Chrome extension, create and verify your account, and connect an available browser ChatGPT session. The Free plan includes 25 user-started automation tasks per calendar month, shared across tools. Ordinary browser Chat is separate; provider limits apply.

Learn about shared context in our privacy policy and choosing Chat or Task.

FROM A PROMPT TO YOUR OWN WORK

Bring the task to your page.

Install WebAct, add your source material and make the result yours.

Install WebAct