逐日AI

面试题库

共 328 题,当前筛选 1 题。

标签
还有 359 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#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#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#vector-index1#workflow-design1#xml-tags1#zero-downtime1

Codex 与 OpenAI Agents SDK 高效使用

D3 Responses API 与内置工具:函数调用、web search / file search / computer use、结构化输出

  • 结构化输出的 strict 模式解决了什么问题,没解决什么问题?拿到输出之后代码里还要做什么?What does strict mode in structured outputs solve, what does it not solve, and what must your code still do after receiving the output?
    国内高频海外高频进阶#structured-output#responses-api#validation

    分析过程 · 先想清楚再作答

    1. 这题考的是对「格式正确」与「内容正确」的区分,答成「有了 strict 就不用校验了」是典型的错误。
    2. 先说解决了什么:strict 加 json_schema 保证输出一定能通过 schema 校验——枚举只会是给定值、必填字段一定在、类型不会错,解析层的 try/catch 与重试基本可以删掉。
    3. 再说没解决什么:schema 管不了语义。verdict 一定是两个枚举之一,但判断可能是错的;数字一定是数字,但可能是编的。业务层校验一行不能省。
    4. 然后是拒答分支:模型因安全原因拒绝时返回 refusal 类型的内容块,而不是硬塞一个不合法的 JSON;不处理它,下游会拿到空的解析结果直接崩,处理了才能区分「不愿意」与「没做对」。
    5. 给出代码里的顺序:先查 refusal,再读 output_parsed,再做业务校验(范围、引用是否存在、与上下文是否一致),最后才落库或执行。
    6. 可预期的追问:strict 对 schema 有什么限制?每个对象都要 additionalProperties 为 false、字段都要在 required 里,可选字段用可空类型表达;这些限制正是它能给出保证的原因。

    How to reason about it · think before answering

    1. This tests the distinction between well-formed and correct; claiming strict mode removes the need for validation is the classic mistake.
    2. What it solves: strict plus json_schema guarantees the output validates against the schema, so enums are always allowed values, required fields exist and types are right; parsing-layer try/catch and retries can largely go.
    3. What it does not solve: semantics. The verdict is one of two enums but may be wrong; a number is a number but may be invented. Business validation stays.
    4. Then refusals: a safety refusal comes back as a refusal content block, not malformed JSON; unhandled, downstream code crashes on an empty parse, handled, you can separate unwilling from incorrect.
    5. Give the order in code: check refusal, read output_parsed, run business checks (ranges, referenced entities exist, consistency with context), then persist or act.
    6. Expect the follow-up: schema restrictions under strict? Every object needs additionalProperties false and all fields in required, optional fields become nullable; these constraints are exactly what makes the guarantee possible.

    答题要点

    • 解决:输出保证符合 schema,解析层防御代码可以删
    • 没解决:语义正确性,业务校验一行不能省
    • 先查 refusal 再读 output_parsed,再做业务校验,最后落库
    • strict 要求 additionalProperties 为 false、字段全在 required 里,可选用可空类型表达

    Key points

    • Solves: output is guaranteed to match the schema, so parsing defenses can go
    • Does not solve: semantic correctness, so business validation stays
    • Check refusal first, then output_parsed, then business checks, then persist
    • Strict requires additionalProperties false and all fields required, optional fields become nullable