Find Expert

Find people who actually know about a topic — not just by org chart, but by real contributions and activity.

Clarify the topic

Work from the topic the user named. If it is ambiguous, ask a brief clarifying question before searching — for example, whether they need someone to answer questions, review code, or make a decision, and whether this is a specific internal system or a general technology. A single sentence of clarification is enough; don't interrogate.

Core Principles

• Activity over title: Someone actively contributing beats someone nominally responsible
• Multiple signals: Code + docs + discussions = true expertise
• Be skeptical: Just mentioning a topic doesn't make someone an expert
• Quality over quantity: 3 vetted experts beats 10 names

Phase 1: Gather Expertise Signals

Find people with multiple evidence of expertise:

1. Start with a synthesized answer from your knowledge tool:

   chat "Who are the experts on [topic] at our company? Consider code contributions, documentation authorship, and meeting participation."

2. Gather additional signals with direct searches:

   employee_search "[topic]"
   code_search "[topic] contributors"
   search "[topic] RFC OR design doc"

3. Cross-reference to find people appearing in multiple sources.

Phase 2: Vet Each Candidate

For each person found, evaluate:

Reject these:

• Single Slack mentions with no other evidence
• People who attended meetings but didn't contribute
• Names that appear in passing, not as experts
• Former employees
• People with outdated involvement

Phase 3: Generate Expertise Report

# Expert Finder: [Topic]

## Vetting Summary
| Candidates Found | Passed Vetting | Rejected |
|------------------|----------------|----------|
| [X] | [Y] | [Z] |

## Top Experts

### 1. [Name] — [Current Role]
**Confidence**: High
**Expertise Signals:**
- [Signal 1 with evidence]
- [Signal 2 with evidence]

**Why they're a good fit:** [Specific evidence]
**Last active:** [When]
**Contact:** [email/Slack]

---

## Also Consider

### Historical Experts
People who had expertise but may be less current:
- **[Name]**: Original architect (now on [other team]) — useful for historical context

### By Official Role
- **[Team]**: Officially owns this area
- **[Person]**: Team lead for [related team]

## Rejected Candidates
| Name | Reason |
|------|--------|
| [Name] | Single Slack mention — insufficient evidence |
| [Name] | No activity in 18 months |

## How to Engage

### For Quick Questions
Try [Person] in Slack — responsive on this topic

### For Deep Dives
Set up time with [Person] — has historical context

### For Official Decisions
Loop in [Person] — has sign-off authority

If No Experts Pass Vetting

# Expert Finder: [Topic]

## No High-Confidence Experts Found

Searched for experts on [topic] but didn't find people with strong evidence of expertise.

**This could mean:**
- This is a new area without established experts
- Expertise exists but isn't well-documented
- Different terminology is used internally

**Suggested next steps:**
1. Try a broader term: [suggestion]
2. Ask in [related Slack channel]
3. Check with [related team] leadership

Troubleshooting

Knowledge Tools Not Connected

If you see errors about missing Glean tools, confirm the Glean MCP server is configured for your host and re-run setup if needed before retrying.