It is true that semistructured interviews for DSM personality disorders do not agree well with each other, and it would be difficult to defend such interviews as gold standards for the diagnosis of personality disorders. However, this may be less the fault of the interviews themselves than the definitions of personality disorders that they set out to assess. The observation has frequently been made that the criteria sets include a mixture of behaviors, feelings, attitudes, and traits, with wide variability in complexity and level of inference (1). The limitations of assessment are likely to continue until the conceptualization and definition of personality disorders improve. As we commented in our article, clarifying the constructs that are presumed to underlie the observed manifestations (e.g., traits, dimensions, and genotypes) would allow more precise and, most likely, more reliable and valid assessments.