面试题库
共 328 题,当前筛选 3 题。
课程全部30 天从前端工程师到 Agent 工程师5 天提示词工程零基础Claude 高效使用:从对话到 Claude CodeCodex 与 OpenAI Agents SDK 高效使用7 天 MCP:把工具接进任何 Agent7 天 Agent Skills:把经验做成可复用能力5 天上下文工程14 天 RAG:从检索到可信回答14 天用 Agent 搭一条 AI 短剧生产线
标签
全部#llm-basics3#evaluation30#cost29#reliability24#architecture22#agent-skills21#security18#observability15#streaming12#error-handling11#idempotency10#system-design10
还有 359 个标签收起标签
#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#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#compression1#configuration1#confused-deputy1#consistent-hashing1#content-hash1#content-safety1#context-assembly1#context-compression1#context-management1#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#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#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
30 天从前端工程师到 Agent 工程师
D1 LLM API 基础:messages/roles、token、流式、temperature;Agent 到底是什么
什么是 token 和上下文窗口?它们如何影响 Agent 的设计?What are tokens and the context window, and how do they shape agent design?
国内高频海外高频基础#llm-basics#context分析过程 · 先想清楚再作答
- 先判断这题问的是「概念」还是「工程后果」。只答定义会被认为没做过工程,必须落到设计影响上。
- 从一条因果链推:token 是计费与长度的计量单位 → 窗口是这个单位的上限 → 模型无状态、历史每轮重发 → 成本随轮数增长 → 所以必须做上下文工程。
- 关键要点出在「Agent 比聊天更严重」:Agent 在循环里反复调模型,还要把工具返回结果也塞回历史,增长速度快得多。
- 结论给出具体手段:滑动窗口、摘要压缩、长期记忆外置到检索系统,并说明各自代价。
- 可以预期的追问:窗口没满为什么也要压缩?答案是长上下文会稀释注意力、抬高延迟与成本,不是塞满了才处理。
How to reason about it · think before answering
- First decide whether this asks for definitions or engineering consequences; a definition-only answer reads as inexperienced.
- Follow the causal chain: tokens are the unit of billing and length, the window caps that unit, models are stateless so history is resent every turn, cost grows with turns, hence context engineering.
- The differentiator is why agents suffer more: a loop calls the model repeatedly and appends tool results back into history.
- Close with concrete tactics: sliding window, summarization, externalized long-term memory, and the cost of each.
- Expect the follow-up: why compress before the window is full? Long contexts dilute attention and raise latency and cost.
答题要点
- token 是模型处理文本的最小单位,大致 1 个汉字 ≈ 1–2 token,1 个英文单词 ≈ 1.3 token
- 上下文窗口是一次请求里输入 + 输出 token 的上限;超出就要截断或压缩
- 模型没有记忆,历史必须每轮重新塞进 messages,所以长对话的成本随轮数线性增长
- Agent 设计因此要做上下文工程:滑动窗口、摘要压缩、把长期记忆外置到检索系统
Key points
- A token is the smallest unit the model processes; roughly 1.3 tokens per English word
- The context window caps input + output tokens per request; beyond it you truncate or compress
- Models are stateless, so the full history is re-sent every turn and cost grows with length
- Hence context engineering: sliding windows, summarization, and external long-term memory
messages 里的 system / user / assistant 三种角色各起什么作用?为什么要有 system?What do the system / user / assistant roles do, and why does system exist?
国内高频海外高频基础#llm-basics#prompt分析过程 · 先想清楚再作答
- 题眼在后半句「为什么要有 system」——前半句是送分,后半句才是区分度所在。
- 先说清三者构成一段可被模型续写的完整文本,角色是给这段文本打的结构化标记。
- 再回答「为什么」:如果把规则写进 user,它就只是对话里的一句话,会被后续几十轮对话稀释;放进 system 才能保持稳定权重,且便于产品侧统一管控、单独灰度。
- 补一条生产视角:真实的 system prompt 通常是模板拼出来的——人设 + 工具说明 + 记忆片段 + 当前时间,而不是一个写死的字符串。
- 常见追问:能不能把 system 放在最后?可以但不推荐,多数模型对靠前的指令更敏感,且会破坏缓存前缀。
How to reason about it · think before answering
- The discriminating half is 'why does system exist'; the first half is a warm-up.
- Explain that the three roles are structural markers over one continuous text the model continues.
- Then the why: rules placed in user are just another turn and get diluted over dozens of turns; system keeps stable weight and can be governed centrally.
- Add production nuance: a real system prompt is templated — persona plus tool docs plus memory plus runtime facts.
- Likely follow-up: can system go last? Possible but unwise — models weight earlier instructions more and it breaks prompt-cache prefixes.
答题要点
- system 设定身份、边界与输出格式,通常放在最前面,权重高于普通对话
- user 是用户输入,assistant 是模型历史回复,两者交替构成对话记录
- 把规则放 system 而不是 user,是为了让规则不被后续对话冲淡,也便于产品统一管控
- 生产里 system prompt 往往由模板拼接:人设 + 工具说明 + 记忆 + 当前时间等动态信息
Key points
- system sets identity, constraints and output format; it sits first and carries more weight
- user is the human turn, assistant is the model's prior replies; they alternate
- Rules live in system so they are not diluted by later turns and can be controlled centrally
- In production the system prompt is templated: persona + tool docs + memory + runtime facts
temperature 和 top_p 分别控制什么?什么场景用 0,什么场景用 0.7?What do temperature and top_p control, and when would you use 0 versus 0.7?
海外高频基础#llm-basics#sampling分析过程 · 先想清楚再作答
- 先说清两者作用在同一个地方——模型算出的下一个 token 概率分布——但作用方式不同,这是区分度所在。
- temperature 是缩放整个分布:越低越尖锐、越确定;top_p 是截断——只保留累计概率达到 p 的那一小圈候选再采样。
- 由此推出实践建议:一般只调其中一个,两个同时调会互相干扰,出了问题分不清是谁造成的。
- 选值不按「创意程度」凭感觉,按「这一步的输出要不要可复现」来定:工具参数、分类判断、结构化输出必须可复现,用 0。
- 补一句 Agent 视角:Agent 的规划与工具调用环节几乎都用低温,只有最终面向用户的自然语言回复才考虑调高。
How to reason about it · think before answering
- Establish that both act on the same next-token distribution but in different ways — that is the discriminator.
- temperature rescales the whole distribution; top_p truncates it to the smallest set reaching cumulative probability p.
- Hence the practical rule: tune one, not both, or you cannot attribute a regression.
- Choose by reproducibility, not by vibes: tool arguments, classification and structured output must be reproducible, so use 0.
- Add the agent angle: planning and tool-calling steps stay cold; only the final user-facing prose warrants higher values.
答题要点
- temperature 缩放下一个 token 的概率分布:越低越确定,越高越随机
- top_p 只从累计概率达到 p 的候选里采样,是另一种截断随机性的方式;一般只调其中一个
- 结构化输出、工具参数、分类判断用 0 或接近 0,保证可复现
- 创意写作、头脑风暴用 0.7–1.0;生产 Agent 的规划步骤通常也偏低温
Key points
- temperature rescales the next-token distribution: lower is more deterministic, higher more random
- top_p samples only from the smallest set whose cumulative probability reaches p; tune one, not both
- Use ~0 for structured output, tool arguments and classification to keep results reproducible
- Use 0.7–1.0 for creative writing; planning steps in production agents usually stay low