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#stopping-criteria1#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#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#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
5 天上下文工程
D5 度量与调优:token 账单、上下文利用率、失败模式排查与综合面试专题
上下文工程做到什么程度算够?你怎么知道该停手了?How much context engineering is enough, and how do you know when to stop?
国内高频海外高频进阶#tuning#stopping-criteria分析过程 · 先想清楚再作答
- 这题是开放题,但它有明确的好坏。答「越优化越好」的人会被判成没有成本意识,因为上下文工程是个能无限做下去的活,不定停手判据就一定会做过头。
- 怎么拆:先说清过度优化的具体代价,不要停在「浪费时间」。裁得太狠会把后面才用得上的字段裁掉,压得太狠会丢掉不像结论的硬性要求,工具裁得太少会让模型没法完成任务。这些都不报错,只在正确率上体现,而正确率是最贵的一笔账。
- 给可核对的停手条件,至少三条:有效信息占比稳定在一个合理区间(比如 50% 以上)且连续几次测量没有上升空间;最长那条用例上的单轮窗口占用率不超过 50%;最近一次改动带来的账单降幅低于 5%。
- 结论落在第三条:降幅低于 5% 说明剩下的都是必要开销,继续压就是在拿正确率换钱。这条比前两条更重要,因为它是唯一一条与具体项目无关、可以直接复用的判据。
- 可预期的追问:那怎么保证停手之后不退化?把这套度量固化成回归:一批固定用例、每次改动都重跑、账单与两个指标进监控。上下文工程不是一次性项目,模型换代、工具增减、下游接口改字段,任何一件都会让它重新变差。
How to reason about it · think before answering
- This is open-ended but has a clear right shape. Saying more optimization is always better reads as lacking cost awareness, because context work is unbounded and will be overdone without a stopping rule.
- Name the concrete cost of overdoing it rather than stopping at wasted time. Trim too hard and you cut fields needed later; compact too hard and you lose hard requirements that do not read like conclusions; cut tools too far and the agent cannot finish the task. None of these raise errors; they show up only in accuracy, the most expensive bill.
- Give at least three checkable stopping conditions: useful-token share stable in a healthy band such as above fifty percent with no headroom across several measurements; per-turn occupancy under fifty percent on your longest case; and the last change delivering less than a five percent bill reduction.
- Land on the third: a sub-five-percent gain means what remains is necessary overhead, and squeezing further trades accuracy for money. It matters most because it is the only condition that transfers across projects unchanged.
- Expect the follow-up on preventing regression. Freeze the measurement into a regression suite: fixed cases, rerun on every change, bill and both metrics under monitoring. Model upgrades, tool churn, and downstream field changes each degrade it again.
答题要点
- 过度优化的代价不报错,只在正确率上体现:裁掉后面才用的字段、压掉不像结论的硬性要求、工具少到做不完任务。
- 三条停手判据:有效信息占比稳定且无上升空间、最长用例的单轮占用率不超过 50%、最近一次改动账单降幅低于 5%。
- 第三条最通用:降幅低于 5% 说明剩下的是必要开销,再压就是拿正确率换钱。
- 停手后要固化成回归:固定用例、每次改动重跑、账单与两个指标进监控。
Key points
- Overdoing it fails silently in accuracy: fields needed later get cut, hard requirements get summarized away, and too few tools leave the task unfinishable.
- Three stopping conditions: a stable useful-token share with no headroom, per-turn occupancy under fifty percent on the longest case, and a last change worth under five percent of the bill.
- The third transfers best: under five percent means what remains is necessary overhead and further squeezing trades accuracy for money.
- After stopping, freeze it into regression: fixed cases, rerun on every change, and monitor the bill plus both metrics.