Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

spaced-repetition

Use when scheduling and executing review sessions at scientifically-calibrated expanding intervals for long-term retention.

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

Run score Not tested

See how to install

Files included (3)

  • SKILL.md3.3 KB
  • examples.md1.6 KB
  • README.md767 B

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Purpose

Schedule review of previously-learned concepts at expanding intervals to exploit the spacing effect. Manages due dates, adjusts intervals based on recall quality, and surfaces overdue items before they decay.

Activation

  • Review session is due based on schedule. Learner initiates review. flashcards deck has due items. Sustained learning track (3+ sessions) needing interval maintenance.
  • Skip if: one-shot session with no continuity. Concept not yet learned. Learner declines scheduling.
  • Routing: overdue items take priority at session start. Coordinate with flashcards for card-level scheduling. Feed interval data to learning-memory.

Inputs

  • Flashcard/item schedule with due dates, learner's current session, items from learning-memory.

Interval Algorithm (Simplified SM2)

Each item has an interval (days) and ease factor (EF, 1.3–2.5). Initial: 1 day → 3 days → then formula.

ScoreLabelInterval RuleEF Change
0FailedReset to 1 dayEF -= 0.2 (min 1.3)
1HardStay at currentEF -= 0.1
2GoodInterval × EFNo change
3EasyInterval × EF × 1.3EF += 0.1 (max 2.5)

Mastery threshold: EF > 2.4, interval > 60 days, 5 consecutive successes → archive.

Workflow

  1. Detect Due Items — Check next_review ≤ today. Sort by overdue duration (most overdue first). Report count.
  2. Scope Session — ≤10 due: review all. >10: prioritize by overdue + weak-area overlap, cap at 15. Report deferrals.
  3. Execute Review — Present front, wait for learner response, reveal back. Self-score: Failed/Hard/Good/Easy. Compute new interval immediately. Never reveal answer before attempt.
  4. Handle Failures — Score 0: reset to 1 day, re-test at end of current session. Failed 3 sessions in a row: flag for misconception-detector.
  5. Update Schedule — Output updated schedule. Show items due in next 7 days. Warn about upcoming review spikes.
  6. Onboard New Items — Fresh concept → add at interval=1 day. Confirm concept is understood first (not still unclear).

Rules

  • DO: never reveal the answer before learner attempts.
  • DO: coach learners on what "Good" vs "Easy" means for self-scoring calibration.
  • DO: stagger new item additions to prevent review spikes.
  • DO: archive mastered items (meet threshold) — don't review indefinitely.
  • DON'T: review items that aren't due — respect the schedule.
  • DON'T: let sessions exceed 15 items — defer the rest.
  • DON'T: add items to schedule before they're genuinely understood.
  • DON'T: frame review sessions as tests — it's memory maintenance.

Output

Session start: due count + overdue count + estimated time. Per-item: topic, question, learner response, answer, score, next review date. Session close: score distribution (easy/good/hard/failed), failed items list, next 7-day schedule. Format naturally.

Checklist

  • Overdue items prioritized first.
  • Session capped at 15 items.
  • Answer not revealed before learner attempt.
  • Failed items re-tested within same session.

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