Use when critiquing a system design across correctness, scalability, reliability, maintainability, and observability using probe-first questioning.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when logging, scoring, and triaging a learner's persistent weak areas to drive intervention selection.
インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。
Maintain a prioritized, evidence-based log of topics where the learner consistently struggles. Drives which skills to activate next and prevents ignoring recurring problems in favor of always-new content.
check-understanding, challenge-generator, or misconception-detector flags a repeated error. Returning learner with prior weak areas. Planning a study/revision session. Learner reports a covered topic is still unclear.lesson-plan and revision-mode. Use tracker to decide between challenge-generator (reinforce) vs teach-concept (re-teach) vs socratic-mode (deepen). Mark confirmed improvements and remove from active tracking.Score each weak area 1–5: score = recurrence × type_weight + staleness_bonus
Intervention selection: Score 1–2 → challenge-generator. Score 3–4 → teach-concept re-teach. Score 5 → socratic-mode then misconception-detector.
last_seen.check-understanding or challenge-generator. 2 consecutive clean passes → "resolving." 3 consecutive → "resolved" and archived. Regression after resolution → re-open.Responses should contain: event details (topic + error type + source skill), action taken (added/incremented), severity score, active weak areas table (topic, type, recurrence, score, recommended intervention), session recommendation (top 1–2 focus areas), and resolution updates if applicable. Format naturally.
まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。
概要と使いどころ
Use when critiquing a system design across correctness, scalability, reliability, maintainability, and observability using probe-first questioning.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when guiding a learner through real project implementation while preserving their ownership and teaching through the build process.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when generating personalized practice challenges calibrated to the learner's weak areas, level, and project context.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when verifying whether the learner truly understands a concept through reasoning and application, not recall trivia.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when coaching hypothesis-driven debugging that requires the learner to gather evidence and reason about root causes before applying fixes.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Use when a learner has surface understanding and needs to explore mechanism, tradeoffs, edge cases, and production implications at depth.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。