agentleFS
bogdanbaciu21bogdanbaciu21/skills/quiz-me/SKILL.md

quiz-me

Skill2 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub

Run an active-recall quiz on a topic, document, book chapter, codebase area, interview subject, meeting-prep topic, or study material the user wants to learn or retain. Use when the user says "quiz me", "test me on", "drill me on", "flashcard me", "ask me questions about", "help me study", "interview prep on", "I need to retain this", or asks to stress-test their understanding of a body of material. Ask one question at a time and adapt difficulty based on responses. Do NOT use to stress-test a plan or decision before implementation — that's `grill-me`. Do NOT use for trivia games unrelated to learning.

18 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use reflect.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • Microsoft AzureSkill

    reflect

    Learning capture system that extracts HIGH/MED/LOW confidence patterns from conversations to prevent repeating mistakes. Use after user corrections ("no", "wrong"), praise ("perfect", "exactly"), or when discovering edge cases. Complements .squad/agents/{agent}/history.md and .squad/decisions.md.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

14 rules. 0 are common, 14 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 18 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 14

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Run a focused, adaptive quiz that helps the user retain material.

    line 8
  2. Distinctive:

    Use the specific source the user names: a document, file, codebase area, book chapter, notes, pasted text, or topic.

    line 14
  3. Distinctive:

    If the source is a file, document, or codebase area, read it before generating questions.

    line 15
  4. Distinctive:

    If the source is only a broad topic, ask what depth they want: intro, working knowledge, or expert.

    line 16
  5. Distinctive:

    If the topic depends on current facts, standards, laws, prices, APIs, schedules, or other changing information, verify the current source …

    line 17
  6. Distinctive:

    Ask for only the missing preferences, then proceed:

    line 21
  7. Distinctive:

    If the user already implies these choices, do not ask.

    line 30
  8. Distinctive:

    Ask one question, then wait for the user's answer.

    line 34
  9. Distinctive:

    Never dump all questions upfront.

    line 35
  10. Distinctive:

    Keep a weak-concept retry queue.

    line 37
  11. Distinctive:

    Do not inflate praise. Be calibrated and useful.

    line 70
  12. Distinctive:

    When the round is complete, provide:

    line 81
  13. Distinctive:

    After the user's answer:

    line 97
  14. Distinctive:

    When editing modes or the weak-concept retry contract, run:

    line 120

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 18 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Quiz Me

Run a focused, adaptive quiz that helps the user retain material. Probe understanding, application, and judgment rather than trivia or keyword recall.

Workflow

Step 1 — Establish the source of truth

  • Use the specific source the user names: a document, file, codebase area, book chapter, notes, pasted text, or topic.
  • If the source is a file, document, or codebase area, read it before generating questions. Do not quiz from memory when an available source can be inspected.
  • If the source is only a broad topic, ask what depth they want: intro, working knowledge, or expert.
  • If the topic depends on current facts, standards, laws, prices, APIs, schedules, or other changing information, verify the current source before quizzing.

Step 2 — Set the format once

Ask for only the missing preferences, then proceed:

  • Question count: default to 5, then offer to continue.
  • Style: default to open-ended for retention; allow multiple choice or mixed if the user asks or speed matters.
  • Difficulty: default to medium with one stretch question; allow easy, medium, hard, or mixed.
  • Mode: infer finance, code, or interview when obvious; otherwise use the general question mix. Load references/modes.md for the mode-specific question patterns.

If the user already implies these choices, do not ask. Start the quiz.

Step 3 — Ask one question at a time

  • Ask one question, then wait for the user's answer.
  • Never dump all questions upfront.
  • Track score, current question number, correct/partial/incorrect count, streaks, and weak concepts internally.
  • Keep a weak-concept retry queue. Add concepts after partial/incorrect answers; clear a concept only after the user answers a follow-up correctly.
  • Accept "I don't know" as an answer, then teach the answer before moving on.

Step 4 — Design strong questions

Mix question types across the round:

  • Definition or distinction.
  • Application to a realistic scenario.
  • Comparison between two concepts.
  • Edge case or failure mode.
  • "Why does this work this way?"
  • "What would break if this changed?"
  • Synthesis across multiple concepts.

For code or technical topics, include at least one "predict the output", "trace the flow", or "spot the bug" question when relevant.

Avoid:

  • Yes/no questions.
  • Trivia, dates, or names unless they are central to the user's stated goal.
  • Questions copied verbatim from the source.
  • Questions answerable by matching keywords without understanding.

Step 5 — Grade before continuing

After each answer:

  • Mark it correct, partial, or incorrect.
  • For partial or incorrect answers, give the correct answer and one sentence explaining why.
  • For correct answers, confirm briefly and add one adjacent piece of useful context that raises the user's understanding.
  • Push back on hand-wavy answers by asking for the missing specificity when that would teach more than immediately revealing the answer.
  • Do not inflate praise. Be calibrated and useful.

Step 6 — Adapt difficulty

  • Two correct answers in a row: make the next question harder or probe an edge case.
  • Two partial or incorrect answers in a row: lower difficulty and revisit the underlying concept before continuing.
  • Consistently strong answers: shift toward application, synthesis, and transfer.
  • Consistently weak answers: shift toward foundations, definitions, and simple examples.

Step 7 — End the round

When the round is complete, provide:

  • Score: X / N correct, with partials noted separately when useful.
  • The 1-2 concepts that need more work.
  • A specific study suggestion, such as rereading a named section, retrying a missed problem type, or reviewing a concrete source excerpt.
  • Offer three next options: another round, a harder round, or a focus round on the weak concepts.

Output Format

Question:

Q[n]/[N] - [difficulty]
[question]

After the user's answer:

[correct / partial / incorrect]
[One-sentence grading explanation, plus one adjacent piece of useful context.]

End-of-round:

Score: X / N
Needs work: [concepts]
Suggested next step: [specific action]

Next: another round, harder round, or focus round?

Tone

Be direct, encouraging, and calibrated. Act like a tough but fair tutor: matter-of-fact when the user is wrong, brief when they are right, and always oriented toward retention.

Skill maintenance

When editing modes or the weak-concept retry contract, run:

PYTHONDONTWRITEBYTECODE=1 python3 evals/run_evals.py

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.