逐日AI

面试题库

共 328 题,当前筛选 1 题。

标签
还有 361 个标签
#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#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#llm-basics2#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#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-design1#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#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

30 天从前端工程师到 Agent 工程师

D28 模拟面试日:国内/海外各一套全流程,自评

  • 一次模拟面试之后,你怎么做一次客观的自我评估,而不是停在「感觉还行」?After a mock interview, how do you assess yourself objectively instead of settling for 'that felt okay'?
    国内高频海外高频进阶#self-assessment#deliberate-practice

    分析过程 · 先想清楚再作答

    1. 这题在考你有没有把练习工程化。答「录下来多听几遍」只是及格线,真正的区分度在于有没有可重复的评分口径和事先定好的阈值——没有口径,两次模拟之间就没法比较,也就谈不上进步。
    2. 客观的前提是有可回放的证据,所以先固定三件事:全程录音或录屏、按时间盒计时、事后对着回放打分而不是结束时凭感觉打。刚讲完的十几分钟里自我评价偏差最大,讲得顺就全盘肯定,卡过一次就全盘否定。
    3. 然后用固定维度代替整体印象:自我介绍、项目讲解深度、编码、系统设计、沟通与反问,各 1 到 5 分,满分 25。关键是每个维度要写好 1 分、3 分、5 分各长什么样的锚点描述,否则同一个「4 分」在两次之间根本不是同一件事。
    4. 阈值要在打分之前定好,这是防止事后给自己找理由的唯一办法:任何单项低于 3 分就进弱项清单,总分低于 18 分就隔两天把整套流程重跑一次,而不是硬着头皮往下走。
    5. 最后一步才是全部价值所在——把低分翻译成四列:现象、根因、最小动作、怎么验证。现象必须是回放里能指着看的事实(带时间、带原话),「讲得不好」不算,「项目讲解到第 8 分钟还没说到我做了什么」才算;最小动作必须一天内做得完;验证必须可观察,最好带数字门槛。
    6. 可以预期的追问:一个人怎么产生追问?用大模型当面试官,但必须先把追问纪律写进指令——一次只问一个问题、基于我的回答连追三层、全程不评价不夸奖不给答案。不写纪律,它会退化成一个不停鼓励你的助手,那就失去了模拟的意义。

    How to reason about it · think before answering

    1. This asks whether you have engineered your practice. 'Record it and listen again' is the passing floor; the discriminator is a repeatable rubric plus thresholds fixed in advance, because without a rubric two sessions are not comparable and improvement is unmeasurable.
    2. Objectivity requires reviewable evidence, so fix three things first: record audio or screen throughout, run the real time boxes, and score against the recording afterwards rather than on feeling at the buzzer. Self-assessment is at its most distorted in the minutes right after you finish.
    3. Then replace overall impression with fixed dimensions: self-introduction, project depth, coding, system design, and communication plus candidate questions, each scored 1 to 5 for a total of 25. What makes it work is writing anchor descriptions for what a 1, a 3, and a 5 look like — otherwise the same '4' means different things in different sessions.
    4. Set thresholds before scoring, which is the only defense against rationalizing afterwards: any dimension below 3 goes on the weakness list, and a total below 18 means rerunning the whole loop two days later instead of pressing on.
    5. The final step carries all the value: translate low scores into four columns — observation, root cause, smallest drill for tomorrow, and how to verify. An observation has to be a fact you can point at in the recording, with a timestamp and the actual words: 'explained it badly' does not qualify, 'eight minutes into the project story and still had not said what I personally did' does. The drill must fit in one day, and verification must be observable, ideally with a numeric bar.
    6. Expect the follow-up: how do you generate follow-up questions alone? Use a model as the interviewer, but write the interrogation rules into the instructions first — one question at a time, three consecutive layers of follow-up grounded in what you just said, and no praise, no evaluation, no supplying the answer. Without those rules it degrades into an encouraging assistant, which defeats the point.

    答题要点

    • 先有证据再有判断:全程录音或录屏、按时间盒计时、事后对着回放打分,不在结束当场凭感觉打
    • 用固定五个维度(自我介绍、项目讲解深度、编码、系统设计、沟通与反问)各 1 到 5 分、满分 25,并给每个维度写 1/3/5 分的锚点描述
    • 阈值先定后打:任何单项低于 3 分进弱项清单,总分低于 18 分隔两天重跑整套流程
    • 把低分翻译成四列:现象、根因、最小动作、怎么验证;现象必须是回放里能指着看的事实,动作必须一天内做得完
    • 一个人练时用大模型当面试官,但要先写死追问纪律:一次一问、连追三层、不评价不夸奖不给答案

    Key points

    • Evidence before judgment: record throughout, run real time boxes, and score against the replay rather than on feeling at the buzzer
    • Use five fixed dimensions (intro, project depth, coding, system design, communication and candidate questions) scored 1 to 5 out of 25, each with anchors for what 1, 3 and 5 look like
    • Fix thresholds before scoring: any dimension below 3 goes on the weakness list, a total below 18 means rerunning the loop two days later
    • Translate low scores into four columns — observation, root cause, smallest drill, verification — where the observation is a pointable fact and the drill fits in one day
    • Practicing alone, use a model as interviewer but write the rules first: one question at a time, three layers of follow-up, no praise, no evaluation, no answers