Dayward AI

Interview Bank

328 questions total; 1 shown with current filters.

Tag
362 more tags
#api-design9#coding-agent9#distributed-systems8#multi-agent8#rag8#chunking7#debugging7#pipeline-design7#structured-output7#agent-loop6#mcp6#operations6#prompt-injection6#sse6#tool-calling6#tool-design6#context5#context-engineering5#deployment5#embeddings5#hybrid-search5#message-bus5#scheduling5#system-prompt5#agentic-rag4#behavioral4#client4#concurrency4#consistency4#framework-design4#ingestion4#prompt-engineering4#rate-limiting4#retrieval4#routing4#trade-offs4#abstention3#agents-sdk3#caching3#communication3#context-window3#cost-control3#data-quality3#failure-modes3#image-generation3#interview-prep3#langgraph3#latency3#llm-as-judge3#llm-basics3#long-context3#model-migration3#model-routing3#orchestration3#ordering3#progressive-disclosure3#prompt-basics3#prompt-caching3#protocol3#provider-abstraction3#ranking3#recall3#redis-streams3#responses-api3#resume3#retry3#runtime3#scalability3#skills3#state-management3#statelessness3#subagents3#timeline3#versioning3#workflow-engine3#access-control2#agent-design2#async-task2#auth2#checkpointing2#citation-verification2#citations2#claude-md2#code-review2#compaction2#context-rot2#contextual-retrieval2#cost-tradeoff2#data-modeling2#database2#distribution2#fallback2#ffmpeg2#golden-set2#grounding2#interview-process2#long-term-memory2#media-pipeline2#memory2#multi-hop2#multi-tenancy2#oauth2#prioritization2#project-storytelling2#prompt-techniques2#query-rewriting2#react2#refusal2#reproducibility2#rerank2#retrieval-quality2#retrospective2#scripts2#sharding2#state-machine2#tool-permissions2#tooling2#tools2#tracing2#transport2#tts2#ux2#vector-database2#verification2#workflow2#agent-basics1#agent-quality1#agent-sdk1#agents-md1#altitude1#analytics1#approvals1#architecture-review1#async1#atomicity1#attention-budget1#av-sync1#backoff1#bi-encoder1#bm251#budget-control1#build-vs-buy1#cancellation1#candidate-selection1#capacity-planning1#career1#chain-of-thought1#ci1#circuit-breaker1#claude-code1#cli-design1#client-integration1#cloud1#compliance1#compression1#configuration1#confused-deputy1#consistent-hashing1#content-hash1#content-safety1#context-assembly1#context-compression1#context-management1#copyright1#coreference1#correctness1#cost-accounting1#cost-analysis1#cost-optimization1#cross-encoder1#cross-model1#customer-support1#dag1#decision-making1#decomposition1#degradation1#deliberate-practice1#design1#diagnostics1#dimensions1#docker1#documentation1#embedding-migration1#encoding1#engineering-judgement1#engineering-tradeoffs1#error-propagation1#escalation1#eval1#event-driven1#evidence1#failure-analysis1#fairness1#faithfulness1#fan-out1#feedback-loop1#fencing-token1#few-shot1#filter-pushdown1#filtering1#fine-tuning1#forking1#four-elements1#framework-selection1#frontend1#global-market1#graph-rag1#guardrails1#hallucination1#handoff1#handoffs1#headless1#hnsw1#hooks1#human-in-the-loop1#hybrid1#hyde1#incremental-recompute1#incremental-sync1#index-maintenance1#index-routing1#indexing1#information-retrieval1#instruction-hierarchy1#integration1#intent-routing1#interrupt-merge1#invalidation1#isolation1#iterative-scan1#ivfflat1#json-parsing1#json-schema1#just-in-time1#jwt1#knowledge-organization1#labeling1#latency-budget1#lease1#least-privilege1#llm-output-quality1#long-session1#loop-guard1#maintenance1#mcp-basics1#mental-model1#messages-api1#metadata1#methodology1#metrics1#migration1#mobile1#model-selection1#moderation1#modularity1#multi-turn1#multimodal1#nodejs1#normalisation1#notifications1#ocr1#offline-testing1#openai1#overlap1#pagination1#parent-child1#pdf-parsing1#performance1#permissions1#persistence1#pgvector1#pipeline-reliability1#portfolio1#primitives1#priority-queue1#proactive-messaging1#product-engineering1#production-readiness1#prompt1#prompt-assembly1#prompt-bloat1#prompt-limits1#prompt-surface1#prompt-template1#prompt-versioning1#prompting1#protocol-versions1#quality1#quality-check1#quantization1#query-transformation1#quiet-hours1#rag-basics1#rank-fusion1#reasoning1#reconnect1#redis1#reflection1#replay1#reporting1#retrieval-failure1#retrieval-metrics1#retry-semantics1#retry-strategy1#review1#risk-assessment1#rollback1#rollout1#rrf1#safety1#sampling1#sandbox1#sandboxing1#scaling1#schema-design1#schema-validation1#scoping1#secrets-management1#self-assessment1#self-introduction1#self-presentation1#self-reflection1#server-design1#service-architecture1#session-management1#sessions1#similarity1#skill-authoring1#skill-description1#skill-design1#spec1#split-brain1#stakeholder-communication1#star1#state-persistence1#stateless1#stdio-transport1#stopping-criteria1#storytelling1#subagent1#subscriptions1#subtitles1#task-graph1#team-governance1#test-set1#test-strategy1#testing1#thresholds1#timezone1#token-accounting1#token-budget1#tool-budget1#tool-execution1#tool-naming1#tool-schema1#trust-boundary1#tuning1#validation1#vector-index1#workflow-design1#xml-tags1#zero-downtime1

Mastering Claude: From Conversation to Claude Code in 5 Days

D1 Advanced Prompting and Claude's "Personality": System Prompt, XML Tags, Letting the Model Think First, Structured Output

  • What belongs in a system prompt and what doesn't? If the model keeps ignoring one rule, what do you check first?system prompt 应该放什么、不该放什么?如果一条规则模型总是不遵守,你会先检查什么?
    Common in ChinaCommon overseasBasic#system-prompt#prompt-design

    How to reason about it · think before answering

    1. The question tests boundaries, not writing skill. Naming what to exclude, and why, is what separates a strong answer.
    2. Give the rule: the system prompt is a fixed premise resent on every request, so it holds only what is true for the whole conversation — role, constraints as prohibitions, output style. Anything that varies per turn belongs in the user message.
    3. Then the anti-patterns: obvious conventions, pasted API docs, and per-turn material dilute the important rules and also invalidate the prompt-cache prefix on every call.
    4. Debug order for an ignored rule: check length first and prune, then check for ambiguity or conflicting rules, and only then add emphasis. If the rule is a must-run action, move it to a deterministic gate instead of adding more words.
    5. Likely follow-up: can system go last? Possible but unwise — earlier instructions carry more weight and a moving prefix breaks caching.

    分析过程 · 先想清楚再作答

    1. 这题考的是「职责边界」而不是「会不会写」。答成「放角色和要求」是及格线,能说出「不该放什么」以及「为什么」才有区分度。
    2. 先给一条判据:system prompt 是每次请求都重发的固定前提,所以只放整场对话都成立的东西——角色、边界(禁止项)、输出风格;每次都变的(时间、用户名、本轮材料)放 user 消息。
    3. 再说反面:把模型本来就知道的常识(「写干净的代码」)、大段 API 文档、每轮都不一样的材料塞进 system,只会稀释真正重要的规则,还会让 prompt caching 的前缀每次都变。
    4. 「规则总是不遵守」的排查顺序:先看 system 是不是太长导致规则被淹没(删到不能再删),再看规则是否含糊或与别的规则冲突,最后才考虑加强调;如果是「每次必须执行」的动作,应该改成程序层面的门禁而不是继续加规则。
    5. 可预期的追问:system 放最后行不行?可以但不推荐——模型对靠前的指令更敏感,且会破坏缓存前缀。

    Key points

    • Include role, prohibitions, and output style — premises that hold for the whole conversation
    • Exclude volatile facts, common sense the model already has, and long pasted docs
    • The system prompt is resent every request: longer means costlier and rules get buried
    • For an ignored rule: prune first, disambiguate second, emphasize last; must-run actions become deterministic gates

    答题要点

    • 放:角色、边界(写禁止项)、输出风格;整场对话都成立的固定前提
    • 不放:会变的信息(时间、用户名、本轮材料)、模型本来就知道的常识、大段文档
    • system 每次请求重发,越长越贵,也越容易让关键规则被淹没
    • 规则不被遵守先删再改再强调;「每次必须做」的动作改成程序门禁