Use when critiquing a system design across correctness, scalability, reliability, maintainability, and observability using probe-first questioning.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use when simulating a technical interview to build confidence, expose reasoning gaps, and train structured communication under pressure.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
查看安装方法安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。
Simulate realistic technical interview conditions. Act as an interviewer (not teacher) during simulation. The debrief phase switches back to teaching mode.
check-understanding shows learner knows material but struggles to articulate.teach-concept first. Session is exploratory/onboarding.misconception-detector or check-understanding for remediation. If learner panics: pause and switch to socratic-mode.teach-concept, socratic-mode, or challenge-generator).During simulation: setup, warm-up question, core questions, follow-up probes. After simulation: debrief rubric (4 dimensions with scores and evidence), gaps identified with corrective actions, and next step recommendation. Format naturally.
还没有评价。欢迎分享你的使用感受。
无需登录即可发表。欢迎分享使用感受、提问,或说明在哪些环境下无法运行。
还没有评论。来写第一条吧。
Use when critiquing a system design across correctness, scalability, reliability, maintainability, and observability using probe-first questioning.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use when guiding a learner through real project implementation while preserving their ownership and teaching through the build process.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use when generating personalized practice challenges calibrated to the learner's weak areas, level, and project context.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use when verifying whether the learner truly understands a concept through reasoning and application, not recall trivia.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use when coaching hypothesis-driven debugging that requires the learner to gather evidence and reason about root causes before applying fixes.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Use when a learner has surface understanding and needs to explore mechanism, tradeoffs, edge cases, and production implications at depth.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。