关于
This Claude Skill acts as an AI learning coach to guide developers through structured learning of new technologies or skills. It assesses existing knowledge, designs a personalized learning path, walks through material, and tests understanding with adaptive difficulty. Use it when starting a new tech, feeling overwhelmed by documentation, needing spaced repetition for retention, or transitioning domains requiring a gap analysis.
快速安装
Claude Code
推荐npx skills add pjt222/agent-almanac -a claude-code/plugin add https://github.com/pjt222/agent-almanacgit clone https://github.com/pjt222/agent-almanac.git ~/.claude/skills/learn-guidance在 Claude Code 中复制并粘贴此命令以安装该技能
技能文档
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-guidanceclears 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.
- Ask experience: "What do you already know about X?"
- Ask adjacent knowledge: "What related topics familiar?" (become bridges)
- Some knowledge claimed → calibration q revealing depth vs surface
- Note vocab: domain terms correct, approximate, or none?
- ID goal specifically: "After learning this, what want to do?"
- 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.
- Break into 4-7 milestones (not too granular, not vague)
- Order by dependency: what before what?
- Per milestone → core concept + core skill
- Estimate time per milestone from avail hours
- ID first milestone — learning begins
- Build early wins: first milestone achievable quickly → momentum
- 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.
- Brief overview: "In this section, learn X → do Y"
- Present in small chunks — one concept per chunk
- Use preferred style: reading → text; hands-on → exercises; discussion → Socratic
- Connect each new concept to something known (from assessment)
- Concrete examples before abstract definitions
- Using docs → guide thru relevant sections, don't send off to read alone
- 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.
- Prediction: "What would happen if changed X?"
- Comparison: "How diff from Y learned earlier?"
- Application: "How use this to solve Z?"
- Debug: "This code has bug related to what we learned — spot it?"
- Celebrate correct answers specifically: "Yes — reason that works is..."
- Incorrect → explore reasoning: "Walk me thru your thinking"
- 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.
- Easy milestone → combine w/ next, or deepen content
- Hard → break smaller, add prereq review
- Interest shifts → adjust to curiosity where possible — engagement drives retention
- Fatigued → break + review later vs push thru
- Teaching approach not working → diff modality (reading→doing, abstract→concrete)
- 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.
- Summarize covered: "Today learned X, Y, Z"
- Ask person state key takeaway in own words
- Brief practice for indep work (not homework — optional reinforcement)
- Recommend 2-3 resources (docs, tutorials, examples)
- Spaced repetition → schedule reviews: "Review again in 2 days, then week"
- Next milestone: "Next time, tackle..."
- 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 acquisitionteach-guidance— coach person to teach others; complementary to learning coachingmeditate-guidance— clear noise before learning → improves focus + retentionremote-viewing-guidance— shares structured observation supporting learning from experience
GitHub 仓库
Frequently asked questions
What is the learn-guidance skill?
learn-guidance is a Claude Skill by pjt222. Skills package instructions and resources that Claude loads on demand, so Claude can perform learn-guidance-related tasks without extra prompting.
How do I install learn-guidance?
Use the install commands on this page: add learn-guidance to Claude Code as a plugin, or clone its repository into your skills directory, then restart Claude so it picks up the skill.
What category does learn-guidance belong to?
learn-guidance is in the Meta category, tagged ai, testing and design.
Is learn-guidance free to use?
Yes. learn-guidance is listed on AIMCP and free to install. It runs inside Claude, so no separate service account is required to use the skill itself.
相关推荐技能
Content Collections 是一个 TypeScript 优先的构建工具,可将本地 Markdown/MDX 文件转换为类型安全的数据集合。它专为构建博客、文档站和内容密集型 Vite+React 应用而设计,提供基于 Zod 的自动模式验证。该工具涵盖从 Vite 插件配置、MDX 编译到生产环境部署的完整工作流。
这个Claude Skill为开发者提供完整的Polymarket预测市场开发支持,涵盖API调用、交易执行和市场数据分析。关键特性包括实时WebSocket数据流,可监控实时交易、订单和市场动态。开发者可用它构建预测市场应用、实施交易策略并集成实时市场预测功能。
该Skill帮助开发者创建OpenCode插件,用于接入命令、文件、LSP等25+种事件。它提供了插件结构、事件API规范和JavaScript/TypeScript实现模式,适合需要拦截操作、扩展功能或自定义事件处理的场景。开发者可通过它快速构建响应式模块来增强OpenCode AI助手的能力。
SGLang是一个专为LLM设计的高性能推理框架,特别适用于需要结构化输出的场景。它通过RadixAttention前缀缓存技术,在处理JSON、正则表达式、工具调用等具有重复前缀的复杂工作流时,能实现极速生成。如果你正在构建智能体或多轮对话系统,并追求远超vLLM的推理性能,SGLang是理想选择。
