MCP HubMCP Hub
스킬 목록으로 돌아가기

learn-guidance

pjt222
업데이트됨 2 days ago
2 조회
17
2
17
GitHub에서 보기
메타aitestingdesign

정보

이 Claude Skill은 개발자가 새로운 기술이나 스킬을 체계적으로 학습할 수 있도록 안내하는 AI 학습 코치 역할을 합니다. 기존 지식을 평가하고, 맞춤형 학습 경로를 설계하며, 자료를 단계별로 안내하고, 적응형 난이도로 이해도를 테스트합니다. 새로운 기술을 시작할 때, 문서가 부담스러울 때, 기억 강화를 위한 간격 반복 학습이 필요할 때, 또는 도메인 전환 시 격차 분석이 필요할 때 사용하세요.

빠른 설치

Claude Code

추천
기본
npx skills add pjt222/agent-almanac -a claude-code
플러그인 명령대체
/plugin add https://github.com/pjt222/agent-almanac
Git 클론대체
git clone https://github.com/pjt222/agent-almanac.git ~/.claude/skills/learn-guidance

Claude Code에서 이 명령을 복사하여 붙여넣어 스킬을 설치하세요

문서

Learn (Guidance)

Guide person thru structured learning for new topic / tech / skill. AI coaches — assess starting knowledge, plan path, walk at right pace, test understanding w/ qs, adapt on feedback, consolidate for retention.

Use When

  • Person wants new tech / framework / lang / concept, doesn't know where to start
  • Overwhelmed by docs / resources, needs structured path
  • Keeps forgetting, needs spaced repetition guidance
  • Transitioning domains (e.g., backend → frontend), needs gap analysis
  • Wants accountability + structure for self-directed
  • After meditate-guidance clears noise → space for focused learning

In

  • Req: What to learn (topic, tech, skill, concept)
  • Req: Purpose (job, interest, project, career change)
  • Opt: Current knowledge level (self-assessed / demonstrated)
  • Opt: Time avail (hr/day/week, deadline)
  • Opt: Preferred style (reading, hands-on, video, discussion)
  • Opt: Prior failed attempts (what didn't work)

Do

Step 1: Assess — Starting Position

Before designing path → understand where person stands.

  1. Ask experience: "What do you already know about X?"
  2. Ask adjacent knowledge: "What related topics familiar?" (become bridges)
  3. Some knowledge claimed → calibration q revealing depth vs surface
  4. Note vocab: domain terms correct, approximate, or none?
  5. ID goal specifically: "After learning this, what want to do?"
  6. ID motivation: curiosity, practical, career, creative
Starting Position Assessment:
┌───────────────┬────────────────────────────┬──────────────────────────┐
│ Level Found   │ Indicators                 │ Path Approach            │
├───────────────┼────────────────────────────┼──────────────────────────┤
│ No exposure   │ No vocabulary, no mental   │ Start with "what" and    │
│               │ model, everything is new   │ "why" before "how"       │
├───────────────┼────────────────────────────┼──────────────────────────┤
│ Surface       │ Has heard terms, no hands- │ Fill vocabulary gaps,    │
│ awareness     │ on experience, vague model │ then move to hands-on    │
├───────────────┼────────────────────────────┼──────────────────────────┤
│ Partial       │ Some experience, gaps in   │ Identify specific gaps   │
│ knowledge     │ understanding, can do some │ and target them directly │
│               │ things but not others      │                          │
├───────────────┼────────────────────────────┼──────────────────────────┤
│ Refresher     │ Knew it before, now rusty  │ Quick review + practice  │
│ needed        │                            │ to reactivate knowledge  │
└───────────────┴────────────────────────────┴──────────────────────────┘

→ Clear picture of starting pos, goal, constraints. Warm + encouraging, not exam — frame qs as curiosity.

If err: Can't articulate current level → ask to describe recent attempt. Concrete stories reveal level > self-assessment. Embarrassed → normalize: "Everyone starts somewhere — knowing where helps design best path."

Step 2: Plan — Design Path

Create structured path from current pos → goal.

  1. Break into 4-7 milestones (not too granular, not vague)
  2. Order by dependency: what before what?
  3. Per milestone → core concept + core skill
  4. Estimate time per milestone from avail hours
  5. ID first milestone — learning begins
  6. Build early wins: first milestone achievable quickly → momentum
  7. Present visually: numbered list w/ brief descriptions

→ Path person sees + understands. Feels manageable, not overwhelming. Person can point to any milestone + understand why there.

If err: Too long → goal ambitious for time → discuss scope reduction. Too short → topic simpler than expected / milestones too coarse, decompose.

Step 3: Guide — Walk Material

Per milestone → guide at right pace.

  1. Brief overview: "In this section, learn X → do Y"
  2. Present in small chunks — one concept per chunk
  3. Use preferred style: reading → text; hands-on → exercises; discussion → Socratic
  4. Connect each new concept to something known (from assessment)
  5. Concrete examples before abstract definitions
  6. Using docs → guide thru relevant sections, don't send off to read alone
  7. Pause per chunk: "Make sense so far?"

→ Person progresses w/ comprehension, not just exposure. Can explain each concept in own words before next. Pace feels right.

If err: Struggling → slow down, check missing prereqs. Breezing → speed up, don't waste time. Material confusing (bad docs) → clearer explanation + note resource quality.

Step 4: Test — Check Understanding

Verify learning w/ application qs, not recall.

  1. Prediction: "What would happen if changed X?"
  2. Comparison: "How diff from Y learned earlier?"
  3. Application: "How use this to solve Z?"
  4. Debug: "This code has bug related to what we learned — spot it?"
  5. Celebrate correct answers specifically: "Yes — reason that works is..."
  6. Incorrect → explore reasoning: "Walk me thru your thinking"
  7. Never frame incorrect as failure → diagnostic info

→ Testing reveals working model vs surface recall. Working handles variations; surface can't. Collaborative, not exam.

If err: Can't answer application → learning too passive, need hands-on before more. Recall yes, application no → concepts individual but not integrated → focus connections.

Step 5: Adapt — Adjust Path

Based on tests + feedback → adjust.

  1. Easy milestone → combine w/ next, or deepen content
  2. Hard → break smaller, add prereq review
  3. Interest shifts → adjust to curiosity where possible — engagement drives retention
  4. Fatigued → break + review later vs push thru
  5. Teaching approach not working → diff modality (reading→doing, abstract→concrete)
  6. Update path + communicate: "Based on how this went, suggest adjust..."

→ Path evolves on real data. No fixed curriculum survives contact w/ actual learner — adaptation = value.

If err: Repeated adaptations still struggle → fundamental prereq gap missed in assessment → return Step 1, probe deeper. Losing motivation → discuss original goal — adjusting goal sometimes > changing path.

Step 6: Review — Consolidate + Plan Next

Solidify + setup continued learning.

  1. Summarize covered: "Today learned X, Y, Z"
  2. Ask person state key takeaway in own words
  3. Brief practice for indep work (not homework — optional reinforcement)
  4. Recommend 2-3 resources (docs, tutorials, examples)
  5. Spaced repetition → schedule reviews: "Review again in 2 days, then week"
  6. Next milestone: "Next time, tackle..."
  7. Ask feedback: "What worked? What diff?"

→ Person leaves w/ clear understanding of learned, practice, next. Clean closing, not abrupt stop.

If err: Can't state takeaway → covered too much / too little stuck. ID one concept most needing reinforcement + focus review. No motivation for indep practice → path more self-contained (all learning in sessions).

Check

  • Starting position assessed before path designed
  • Path has clear milestones ordered by dependency
  • Material presented in small chunks w/ comprehension checks
  • Testing used application qs, not just recall
  • Path adapted ≥1 based on actual progress
  • Session ended w/ summary, practice suggestion, next steps
  • Person felt encouraged, not tested / judged

Traps

  • Info dumping: All material at once vs pacing thru milestones. Overwhelm kills learning.
  • Skip assessment: Assume level vs check. Frontend expert learning backend may know adjacent concepts but not ones you expect.
  • Teach to average: Person faster / slower than expected → pace must change. Stick to plan despite feedback → wastes time / loses them.
  • All theory, no practice: Understanding requires doing. Every milestone → practice element.
  • Ignore motivation: Person doesn't see why matters → won't retain. Connect concepts to stated goal.
  • Overload sessions: Too much one sitting. Less w/ retention > more w/ forgetting.
  • Coach-as-lecturer: Coach guides exploration, doesn't monologue. More qs than answers.

  • learn — AI self-directed variant → systematic knowledge acquisition
  • teach-guidance — coach person to teach others; complementary to learning coaching
  • meditate-guidance — clear noise before learning → improves focus + retention
  • remote-viewing-guidance — shares structured observation supporting learning from experience

GitHub 저장소

pjt222/agent-almanac
경로: i18n/caveman-ultra/skills/learn-guidance
0
agentsagentskillsai-assisted-developmentclaude-codeskillsteams

연관 스킬

content-collections

메타

이 스킬은 콘텐츠 콜렉션(Content Collections)을 위한 프로덕션 검증된 설정을 제공합니다. 콘텐츠 콜렉션은 Markdown/MDX 파일을 Zod 검증이 포함된 타입 안전한 데이터 콜렉션으로 변환해주는 TypeScript 최우선 도구입니다. 블로그, 문서 사이트 또는 콘텐츠 중심의 Vite + React 애플리케이션을 구축할 때 타입 안전성과 자동 콘텐츠 검증을 보장하기 위해 사용하세요. Vite 플러그인 구성과 MDX 컴파일부터 배포 최적화 및 스키마 검증에 이르기까지 모든 것을 다룹니다.

스킬 보기

polymarket

메타

이 스킬은 개발자들이 Polymarket 예측 시장 플랫폼을 활용한 애플리케이션을 구축할 수 있도록 지원하며, 거래 및 시장 데이터를 위한 API 통합 기능을 포함합니다. 또한 WebSocket을 통한 실시간 데이터 스트리밍을 제공하여 실시간 거래와 시장 활동을 모니터링할 수 있습니다. 이를 통해 거래 전략을 구현하거나 실시간 시장 업데이트를 처리하는 도구를 생성하는 데 활용할 수 있습니다.

스킬 보기

creating-opencode-plugins

메타

이 스킬은 개발자들이 명령어, 파일, LSP 작업 등 25개 이상의 이벤트 유형에 연결되는 OpenCode 플러그인을 만들 수 있도록 돕습니다. JavaScript/TypeScript 모듈을 위한 플러그인 구조, 이벤트 API 명세, 구현 패턴을 제공합니다. OpenCode AI 어시스턴트의 라이프사이클을 사용자 정의 이벤트 기반 로직으로 가로채거나, 모니터링하거나, 확장해야 할 때 사용하세요.

스킬 보기

sglang

메타

SGLang은 RadixAttention 프리픽스 캐싱을 활용하여 JSON, 정규식, 에이전트 워크플로우를 위한 고속 구조화 생성에 특화된 고성능 LLM 서빙 프레임워크입니다. 특히 반복되는 프리픽스가 있는 작업에서 상당히 빠른 추론 속도를 제공하여 복잡한 구조화 출력 및 다중 턴 대화에 이상적입니다. 제약 디코딩이 필요하거나 광범위한 프리픽스 공유가 있는 애플리케이션을 구축할 때는 vLLM과 같은 대안보다 SGLang을 선택하십시오.

스킬 보기