agentleFS
m3dcodiem3dcodie/claude-cert-CCAR-F/.claude/skills/study-guide/SKILL.md

study-guide

Skill0 starsChanged 48 days agoMITView on GitHub

Track progress through this CCAR-F study repo and run interactive quiz drills from quiz_bank.md. Use when the user asks what to study next, wants a progress check, wants to run an example, or wants to be quizzed on a domain or task statement.

5 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

  • Other versions5 projects use a version of this.

    Word for word · 0

    None found.

    Edited · 0

    None found.

    Wrote their own version · 5

    1. calebnewtonusc/Chewbacca★ 8same name
    2. nisarth/claude-skills-store★ 1same name
    3. rzhang569/study-guide★ 1same name
    4. sdyd98/claude-skills★ 0same name
    5. thomas-d-ang/claude-skills★ 0same name

    How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

3 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 5 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 3

    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:

    If all examples in a domain are run and no quiz attempted yet for it → quiz the whole domain.

    line 68
  2. Distinctive:

    Never reveal quiz answers except one at a time, after the user has answered.

    line 94
  3. Distinctive:

    Keep status output short — a table and one recommended next step, not a restatement of the whole repo README.

    line 95

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 5 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

Study guide skill

This skill is a navigator and quizzer over the repo's existing content (outline.md, domain-*/README.md, domain-*/examples/*.py, quiz_bank.md, exercises/). It never writes new study material — no new questions, no new example scripts, no rewritten theory notes. If a gap in the content is found, say so and suggest the user open an issue/PR upstream; don't patch it inline. Passive authoring doesn't build retention here — quizzing and doing does.

Progress file

State lives in study-progress.md at the repo root, created on first use if missing (and added to .gitignore — this file is per-learner, never committed). Structure:

# Study Progress — CCAR-F

Started: <date>

## Domain 1 — Agentic Architecture & Orchestration (27%)
- [ ] README read
- [ ] 01_agentic_loop.py run
- [ ] 02_coordinator_subagent.py run
... (one line per example file, in numeric order)

Quiz attempts: Q1✅ Q3❌ Q7✅ ...
Weak task statements: 1.5, 1.7   <!-- any T.S. with an unresolved ❌ -->

## Domain 2 ...
## Domain 3 ...
## Domain 4 ...
## Domain 5 ...

## Exercises
- [ ] 01_multi_tool_agent_escalation
- [ ] 02_team_workflow_config
- [ ] 03_extraction_pipeline
- [ ] 04_research_pipeline

## Session Log
- <date>: <one-line summary of what happened this session>

A "weak" task statement is one where the most recent attempt on any question tagged to it was ❌. Answering it correctly on a later attempt clears it.

Commands

status (default, no args) — read study-progress.md (initialize it from the template above if it doesn't exist, scanning each domain-*/examples/ dir to list actual filenames). Print a compact table: per domain, README read?, examples run X/Y, quiz score, weak T.S. list. Then hand off to next.

next — recommend exactly one concrete next action, in this priority order:

  1. Any weak task statement → re-quiz it (few questions, fast feedback loop).
  2. The next unread domain README, in weight order: D1 → D3 → D4 → D2 → D5 (see root README.md for why this order).
  3. The next un-run example in the current domain.
  4. If all examples in a domain are run and no quiz attempted yet for it → quiz the whole domain.
  5. Once all 5 domains are read + quizzed → the next un-started exercise in exercises/ (numeric order). Give the recommendation as one sentence plus the reason, not a menu.

quiz <domain N | T.S. x.y> — pull the matching questions from quiz_bank.md (match on the ### T.S. x.y heading or ## Domain N heading). Prioritize, in order: previously-missed questions, then unattempted ones. Ask one question at a time, full text, options included, and wait for the user's answer before revealing anything. Do not print the <details> answer key up front. After each answer: say correct/incorrect, give the explanation from the answer key, then record the result in study-progress.md (append to Quiz attempts, update weak T.S. list) before moving to the next question. Stop after all matched questions are covered or the user says stop.

run <example-path-or-number> — actually execute it (python3 domain-N-.../examples/NN_name.py) via Bash. If it exits 0, mark that line done in study-progress.md. If it fails, report the error — don't silently mark it done, don't fix the repo's example code as a side effect (that's a separate, explicit ask).

Notes

  • Task statement numbers in quiz_bank.md (T.S. x.y) match outline.md and each domain's README.md exactly — cross-reference by that tag.
  • Never reveal quiz answers except one at a time, after the user has answered.
  • Keep status output short — a table and one recommended next step, not a restatement of the whole repo README.

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.