本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

simplify-topic

Use when a concept is too abstract for the learner's current level and needs analogy-first teaching before complexity re-injection.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(3)

  • SKILL.md3.9 KB
  • examples.md2.0 KB
  • README.md766 B

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Purpose

Reframe a concept at a lower abstraction so the learner builds accurate intuition before encountering technical complexity. Simplification is choosing the right abstraction for the learner's mental model, then re-injecting complexity once the foundation is stable.

Activation

  • Learner says "I don't understand" or "explain like I'm new." check-understanding reveals prior explanation was too abstract/jargon-heavy. Cross-domain learner needs an analogy bridge. teach-concept was used and learner still can't state the core intuition.
  • Skip if: learner understands basics and needs depth → deep-dive. Confusion is from a misconception → misconception-detector. Concept is simple enough already.
  • Routing: after successful simplification, use teach-concept to re-introduce correct technical terminology. Never leave learner permanently at simplified level.

Inputs

  • Concept to simplify, learner's background domain, abstraction level where understanding broke, specific unclear aspect.

Abstraction Levels

  • Level 0 (Everyday): household/daily life analogy, zero technical vocab → absolute beginner.
  • Level 1 (Domain-Adjacent): analogy from learner's known field → practitioner switching domains.
  • Level 2 (Simplified Technical): correct terms, simplified mechanism → beginner with some background.
  • Level 3 (Full Technical): precise mechanism with edge cases → standard teach-concept level.

Workflow

  1. Detect — Ask one question to identify where understanding breaks (terminology? mechanism? motivation?). Identify learner's domain for analogy selection. Select starting level (0, 1, or 2).
  2. Build Analogy — One analogy from the learner's known domain. State explicitly where it holds AND where it breaks down — oversimplified analogies create new misconceptions.
  3. Simplified Explanation — Deliver at selected level using the analogy as scaffold. One core idea per step. No technical vocabulary at level 0; introduce terms one at a time at level 2.
  4. Intuition Check — Ask learner to restate in their own words using the analogy. If wrong: identify failure point and rebuild with a different analogy.
  5. Complexity Re-Injection — Introduce one layer of technical accuracy on top of confirmed intuition. Replace analogy language with correct terms, one at a time. Confirm at each step.
  6. Handoff — When learner articulates using correct vocabulary: hand off to teach-concept or deep-dive.

Rules

  • DO: always state where the analogy breaks down — analogies that never fail create misconceptions.
  • DO: complexity re-injection is mandatory — simplification is a bridge, not a destination.
  • DO: confirm the analogy domain is familiar to the learner before using it.
  • DON'T: use multiple analogies simultaneously — pick the best one until it fails.
  • DON'T: discard a failing analogy until after 2 attempts; then switch.
  • DON'T: leave the session at simplified level — at minimum introduce correct vocabulary.
  • DON'T: simplify a concept the learner already understands correctly — probe first.

Output

Responses should contain: context (concept + confusion level + learner background + selected level), analogy (with explicit limits), simplified explanation, intuition check prompt, complexity re-injection steps, and handoff plan. Format naturally.

Checklist

  • Analogy grounded in learner's known domain and limits stated.
  • Learner restates concept using analogy before re-injection.
  • Complexity re-injection introduces correct technical vocabulary.
  • Session does not end at simplified level.

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Use when critiquing a system design across correctness, scalability, reliability, maintainability, and observability using probe-first questioning.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

yugash007/edu-agent-skills92026年5月19日 更新

Use when guiding a learner through real project implementation while preserving their ownership and teaching through the build process.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

yugash007/edu-agent-skills92026年5月19日 更新

Use when generating personalized practice challenges calibrated to the learner's weak areas, level, and project context.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

yugash007/edu-agent-skills92026年5月19日 更新

Use when verifying whether the learner truly understands a concept through reasoning and application, not recall trivia.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

yugash007/edu-agent-skills92026年5月19日 更新

Use when coaching hypothesis-driven debugging that requires the learner to gather evidence and reason about root causes before applying fixes.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

yugash007/edu-agent-skills92026年5月19日 更新

deep-dive

無料

Use when a learner has surface understanding and needs to explore mechanism, tradeoffs, edge cases, and production implications at depth.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

yugash007/edu-agent-skills92026年5月19日 更新

yugash007 のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する