面试题库
共 328 题,当前筛选 1 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#server-design1#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#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#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#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
7 天 MCP:把工具接进任何 Agent
D3 resources 与 prompts:URI 模板、变更通知、进度与日志、分页,以及客户端能力
同一份数据,做成 MCP 资源和做成工具有什么区别?你按什么标准选?For the same data, what is the difference between exposing it as an MCP resource versus a tool, and how do you choose?
国内高频海外高频基础#primitives#server-design分析过程 · 先想清楚再作答
- 这题在筛「有没有真的设计过服务端」。答成「资源是只读的、工具会改数据」只能算及格,因为只读的检索照样该做成工具,区分度全在这一步。
- 拆法:不要问「它是什么」,问「这一次由谁决定用不用它」。规范把资源定成应用驱动——由宿主应用或用户挑;工具是模型控制——模型看着描述自己调。控制方定了,出错时该找谁负责也就定了。
- 再补一条更实用的判据:能不能被枚举。资源要出现在一张可翻页的清单里让人挑,所以「搜索代码」这种输入空间无限的能力,哪怕完全只读也必须做成工具。
- 结论:只读、可枚举、希望用户在界面上挑的做成资源;有副作用、或需要模型自己判断时机、或无法枚举的做成工具。
- 生产视角要主动加一句成本:工具定义不管用不用,每轮都要塞进请求;资源不被选中就一个 token 都不占。三千篇文档做成三千个工具会直接撑爆上下文,做成资源则按需付费。
- 可预期的追问:那提示模板算第几种?答案是第三种,由用户显式选中,典型形态是斜杠命令——三种原语的差别只在控制方,不在能力。
How to reason about it · think before answering
- This screens for real server design experience. Saying resources are read-only and tools mutate scores a pass at best, because read-only search still belongs in a tool.
- Reframe it: do not ask what the data is, ask who decides to use it this time. The spec makes resources application-driven, picked by the host or the user, while tools are model-controlled. Fixing the controller also fixes who is accountable when it goes wrong.
- Add the practical test: enumerability. A resource has to appear in a paginated list a human can pick from, so a code search with an unbounded input space must be a tool even though it never writes anything.
- Conclusion: read-only, enumerable, user-selectable becomes a resource; side-effecting, model-timed, or non-enumerable becomes a tool.
- Bring up cost unprompted: tool definitions ship on every turn whether used or not, while an unselected resource costs zero tokens. Three thousand documents as three thousand tools blows up the context window; as resources they are pay-per-use.
- Likely follow-up: where do prompts fit? They are the third primitive, user-selected and usually surfaced as slash commands — the three differ only by who controls them.
答题要点
- 资源是应用驱动的,由宿主或用户挑;工具是模型控制的,由模型看描述自己调
- 能不能枚举是最实用的分界线:搜索这类输入空间无限的能力即使只读也做成工具
- 成本上工具定义每轮都占上下文,资源不被选中就不花钱,大规模知识库必须走资源
- 控制方决定了出错时找谁负责:模型选错是描述问题,用户选错是命名问题,应用塞错是产品问题
Key points
- Resources are application-driven and picked by host or user; tools are model-controlled and chosen from their descriptions
- Enumerability is the practical dividing line: unbounded-input capabilities like search stay tools even when read-only
- Cost-wise tool definitions occupy context every turn while unselected resources cost nothing, so large corpora must be resources
- The controller determines accountability: bad tool choice means bad descriptions, bad prompt choice means bad naming, bad resource injection is a product problem