Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

revision-mode

Use when a learner needs a structured review session prioritizing high-value topics by recency, error history, and upcoming deadlines.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

See how to install

Files included (3)

  • SKILL.md3.6 KB
  • examples.md1.7 KB
  • README.md764 B

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Purpose

Run a structured, prioritized revision session targeting topics most likely to decay, most frequently missed, or most important for an upcoming deadline. Not random review — weighted prioritization to maximize learning per minute.

Activation

  • Upcoming deadline (interview, exam, demo) within 1–5 sessions. Learner requests review after a learning period. weak-area-tracker shows accumulated weak areas. 3+ sessions since last review.
  • Skip if: learner needs new material first. Goal is project implementation → build-with-me. Only one topic to review → use check-understanding/challenge-generator directly.
  • Routing: pull priorities from weak-area-tracker. Use check-understanding and challenge-generator as execution vehicles. After 3 consecutive clean revision passes on a topic: mark revision-complete and de-prioritize.

Inputs

  • Topics covered (from learning-memory), active weak areas, upcoming deadline + type, session time budget, self-assessed confidence per topic (optional).

Priority Scoring (1–10)

  • Weak area severity: 0–3 (from tracker). Recency (days since last review): 0–3. Deadline relevance: 0–2. Low self-reported confidence: 0–2.
  • Score 7+ = must-revise. Score 4–6 = should-revise. Below 4 = defer.

Workflow

  1. Scope — Gather topics + weak areas. Ask: "Deadline? Least confident topics?" Apply priority scoring.
  2. Plan — Present focused list: must-revise first, then should-revise if time permits. Cap at 4–5 topics max. State approach per topic: concept check / challenge / flashcard drill.
  3. Recap — For each topic: ask learner to summarize in 2–3 sentences. Don't re-explain unless summary reveals a gap. 2–3 min cap per recap.
  4. Test — 1–2 exercises per topic via check-understanding or challenge-generator. Mix modes. Run 3–5 due flashcards per topic if available.
  5. Check Exit — Clean pass = correct response with correct reasoning on first attempt. After 3 clean passes across sessions: exit rotation. Below 50% pass rate this session: escalate to misconception-detector.
  6. Close — Summarize: which topics are revision-complete, which need another round. Update weak-area-tracker. Recommend next session if deadline still approaching.

Rules

  • DO: revision is active — learner produces answers, not just reads.
  • DO: include weak areas in every revision session until resolved.
  • DO: state clean-pass criteria before the session, not after.
  • DON'T: re-lecture topics the learner can summarize correctly — test immediately.
  • DON'T: pack more than 5 topics per session.
  • DON'T: skip the hardest topics in favor of comfortable ones — must-revise (7+) first.
  • DON'T: let same topics appear indefinitely — enforce exit criteria.

Output

Responses should contain: deadline + time budget, prioritized topic list (must-revise with scores and approach, should-revise if time permits), per-topic recall + test + outcome, and session summary (clean passes, still-needs-revision, exiting rotation, next session recommendation). Format naturally.

Checklist

  • Priority scoring applied before session plan.
  • Must-revise topics addressed first.
  • Every topic has at least one active retrieval exercise.
  • Weak-area-tracker updated at session close.

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

Use when critiquing a system design across correctness, scalability, reliability, maintainability, and observability using probe-first questioning.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

yugash007/edu-agent-skills10Updated May 19, 2026

Use when guiding a learner through real project implementation while preserving their ownership and teaching through the build process.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

yugash007/edu-agent-skills10Updated May 19, 2026

Use when generating personalized practice challenges calibrated to the learner's weak areas, level, and project context.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

yugash007/edu-agent-skills10Updated May 19, 2026

Use when verifying whether the learner truly understands a concept through reasoning and application, not recall trivia.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

yugash007/edu-agent-skills10Updated May 19, 2026

Use when coaching hypothesis-driven debugging that requires the learner to gather evidence and reason about root causes before applying fixes.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

yugash007/edu-agent-skills10Updated May 19, 2026

Use when a learner has surface understanding and needs to explore mechanism, tradeoffs, edge cases, and production implications at depth.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

yugash007/edu-agent-skills10Updated May 19, 2026

See all skills by yugash007

Report a problem with this skill