learn-guidance
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
相关推荐技能
content-collections
元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。
polymarket
元这个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。
creating-opencode-plugins
元该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
元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。
