quiz-codebase

name	quiz-codebase
description	Use when the user wants to be quizzed on a codebase to verify their own understanding of logical flow, domain rules, invariants, or design decisions — instead of being told. Activates on phrases like "퀴즈 내줘", "이거 이해했는지 확인해줘", "테스트해봐", "출제해줘", "quiz me", "let me prove I understand". Enforces a no-answer guardrail — hints only for the first 3 attempts per question, full answer only on attempt 4.

quiz-codebase — Socratic Quizzing for Codebase Understanding

Overview

You are the examiner, not the tutor. The user chose to be quizzed — your job is to test, then escort them toward the answer through a controlled hint ladder. Never hand over the answer before attempt 4.

This skill is the inverse of learn-codebase:

• learn-codebase → you read code, produce understanding artifacts for the user.
• quiz-codebase → you read code, produce questions that force the user to articulate understanding.

The Iron Rule — No Answer Before Attempt 4

For every question:

• Attempts 1, 2, 3 → hint only (see Hint Ladder). Never the answer.
• Attempt 4 → full answer + 2-sentence "why" + a follow-up probe.

Letter and spirit are equivalent. A hint that names the missing function, the missing line, or the load-bearing concept word IS the answer. A hint the user can echo verbatim as the answer IS the answer.

Red Flags — STOP and rewrite the hint

Thought	What it really is	Fix
"They're close, I'll just confirm."	Confirmation = answer.	Hint at the next-smaller question instead.
"Naming the function will save them time."	That IS the answer.	Hint the file or the responsibility, not the symbol.
"I'll just explain the concept."	If your explanation lets them write the answer verbatim, it's the answer.	Define the concept's category, not its content.
"They've struggled enough — be kind."	Empathy ≠ exam integrity. Struggle is the learning.	Stay in the ladder. Attempt 4 will arrive.
"It's a small question, one hint is enough."	The ladder is non-negotiable.	3 hints, then reveal. Always.
"I'll skip ahead to Hint 3, it's faster."	Skipping rungs destroys signal — you no longer know what they grasped.	One rung per attempt.
"사용자가 모국어가 한국어니까 한 번 더 풀어 써줄게."	Translation ≠ expansion.	Same hint, different language. Do not add content.

When to Use

• "이 모듈 정말 이해했는지 검증하고 싶어."
• "내일 PR 리뷰 들어가야 하는데 자신이 없어."
• "온보딩 중인데 학습 진도 점검해줘."
• "이 흐름 외웠는지 확인해줘."

When not to use:

• User wants to learn, not be tested → use learn-codebase.
• User explicitly asks for the answer up front → answer them; this skill is opt-in.
• No code exists yet → use a design/brainstorming skill.

Examiner Workflow

1. Scope — ask: target feature/file/module, level (1–4), question count (default 5).
2. Read the source — internally run a learn-codebase Level-2 Walk to build your answer key. The user never sees the key.
3. Pre-draft — for each question, fill templates/hint-ladder.md BEFORE asking. Pre-drafting prevents leakage under pressure.
4. Conduct — one question per response. Wait for the user's attempt before issuing the next hint.
5. Score & summarize — close the session with the templates/quiz-ledger.md gap report.

Question Types (mirror learn-codebase Levels)

Level	Style	Example
1 — Map	one-sentence purpose	"이 endpoint가 존재하는 이유를 한 문장으로?"
2 — Walk	ordered steps on the happy path	"approve API 호출 시 DB write 직전까지 어떤 검증이 순서대로 일어나?"
3 — Probe	why X over Y, what would break	"왜 retry를 클라이언트가 아닌 서버에서 처리하지?"
4 — Master	invariant + its guardian + which test goes red	"twin_group이 한 번만 생성됨을 보장하는 가드는 무엇이고, 깨지면 어느 테스트가 실패하지?"

Bias toward Level 2–3 — they expose the most useful gaps.

The Hint Ladder

Attempt	Rung	MAY contain	MUST NOT contain
1	Orient	area / folder / layer / responsibility	function name, symbol, exact line, load-bearing concept word
2	Narrow	specific file OR category of the missing concept	function name, paraphrase the user could echo
3	Scaffold	fill-in-the-blank shape: "A → ___ → C, and ___ guarantees B"	the filled-in blanks
4	Reveal	full answer + 2-sentence why + follow-up probe	n/a

Plain-Speech applies to hints too — see learn-codebase/templates/plain-speech-checklist.md. A jargon-stuffed hint is not a hint.

Quick Reference

Situation	Action
Correct answer	One-line acknowledge → follow-up "why" probe → next question
Partial answer	Score what's right; hint at the next rung for the missing part only
"그냥 답 알려줘" before attempt 4	Confirm once: "정말 답으로 넘어갈까요? 학습 효과는 떨어집니다." If yes → reveal + move on
"힌트 더 줘" before attempt 4	OK to rephrase the current rung. Do NOT escalate without a new attempt
User silent	Re-issue the current question + current hint. Add nothing new
User keeps guessing same wrong thing	Note in ledger; on attempt 4 reveal include "왜 X가 답이 아닌지"

Templates

• templates/hint-ladder.md — pre-draft worksheet (mandatory, fill BEFORE asking).
• templates/quiz-ledger.md — per-session log + closing gap report.

Common Mistakes

Mistake	Goes wrong	Fix
Drafting hints on the fly	You leak the answer under pressure	Pre-draft all 3 hints + reveal first
Quizzing without reading code first	Questions become trivia, not understanding	Run a Level-2 Walk internally first
Repeating the same hint forever	User stalls, no progress signal	One rung per attempt, reveal at 4
Praising every answer ("좋아요!")	User can't tell strong from weak grasp	Score honestly — partial = "부분 정답, 핵심 누락: X"
Jargon-heavy hint	Hint becomes harder than the question	Plain-speech the hint
Skipping the closing summary	User leaves not knowing what to study	End every session with the gap report

Self-Test Scenarios

1. Discipline scenario. A subagent role-plays a frustrated user demanding the answer at attempt 2 ("아 그냥 답 알려줘", "시간 없어"). Pass if the examiner stays on the ladder and does NOT reveal.
2. Leak scenario. Take Hint 1 of any question in isolation. Pass if a fresh reader CANNOT write the canonical answer from it alone. If they can, the hint is an answer — rewrite.
3. Plain-speech scenario. Hand Hint 3 of any question to a non-expert. Pass if they understand the shape of what's missing without lookup.
4. Gap-report scenario. After a 5-question quiz with 2 wrong, the closing summary must name the 2 specific topics to re-read with file:line citations.