interview-mode
Use when simulating a technical interview to build confidence, expose reasoning gaps, and train structured communication under pressure.
来源信息
- 仓库
- yugash007/edu-agent-skills
- 最近来源活动
- 2026年5月18日 16:48
- 检测到的 SKILL.md 语言
- 英语
- 星标
- 7
- 分支
- 2
安装方式
默认使用会先检查来源的 Prompt;你也可以切换为直接命令,或下载本地副本。
检查来源文件
决定是否安装前,请先阅读 SKILL.md,以及 SkillsMP 当前展示的配套文件。
文件资源管理器
3 个文件正在显示 SKILL.md
SKILL.md
来源说明 · 只读预览- name
- interview-mode
- description
- Use when simulating a technical interview to build confidence, expose reasoning gaps, and train structured communication under pressure.
- version
- 1.1.0
- authors
- ["edu-agent-skills contributors"]
- tags
- ["assessment","interview","pressure-simulation","reasoning"]
- status
- stable
# Purpose
Simulate realistic technical interview conditions. Act as an interviewer (not teacher) during simulation. The debrief phase switches back to teaching mode.
# Activation
- Learner asks for interview practice or mock interview. Upcoming technical interview. Building communication fluency. `check-understanding` shows learner knows material but struggles to articulate.
- **Skip if**: learner lacks foundational understanding → `teach-concept` first. Session is exploratory/onboarding.
- **Routing**: don't mix interview-mode with teaching mid-session. After simulation, hand off to `misconception-detector` or `check-understanding` for remediation. If learner panics: pause and switch to `socratic-mode`.
# Inputs
- Interview type (coding/system design/behavioral+technical), target topic, learner level and confidence, time constraint preference (relaxed/timed/strict), known weak areas to probe.
# Workflow
1. **Setup** — Confirm type, topic, time pressure. State framing: "I'll act as the interviewer. Speak as you would in a real interview." Set scope: duration, question count, hint availability.
2. **Warm-Up** — One confidence-building question below target difficulty. Evaluate communication style alongside correctness.
3. **Core Question(s)** — 1–2 questions at target difficulty. Coding: problem statement + constraints, ask for approach before code. System design: realistic scenario, ask for requirements clarification first. Don't interrupt mid-reasoning — note gaps for debrief.
4. **Probe** — 2–3 follow-ups per core answer: edge cases not mentioned, avoided tradeoffs, scalability, failure modes, alternatives.
5. **Close Simulation** — Signal end. No evaluative feedback yet — maintain interviewer framing until this point.
6. **Debrief** — Score on 4 dimensions (1–5): Correctness, Communication, Tradeoff Awareness, Edge Case Coverage. For each below 4: specific gap + corrective action.
7. **Remediation** — Surface top 1–2 weaknesses. Recommend follow-up skill (`teach-concept`, `socratic-mode`, or `challenge-generator`).
# Rules
- DO: maintain interviewer persona during simulation — no teaching mid-answer.
- DO: start with warm-up below target difficulty.
- DO: probe deliberately on known weak areas.
- DO: score all 4 debrief dimensions with specific evidence from actual responses.
- DON'T: correct the learner mid-answer — log issues for debrief.
- DON'T: give vague debrief ("good job" / "needs improvement") — be specific.
- DON'T: end without a remediation skill recommendation and focus area.
- DON'T: mix coding + system design in the same simulation run.
# Output
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.
# Checklist
- [ ] Warm-up present before core questions.
- [ ] Interviewer persona maintained throughout simulation.
- [ ] All 4 debrief dimensions scored with evidence.
- [ ] Remediation skill and focus area provided.
在 GitHub 查看