Review Content

Comprehensive review of course content (chapters, exercises, labs, etc.) for accuracy, pedagogy, and quality.

Interactive Workflow

Step 1: Content Type

What type of content are you reviewing?

[1] Chapter/Tutorial
[2] Exercise/Problem
[3] Lab/Workshop
[4] Slides/Presentation
[5] Quiz/Assessment
[6] Project specification

Please select an option:

Step 2: Course Context

Which course is this content for?

[1] C++ Fundamentals (Junior Developers)
[2] [Other configured courses...]

Please select an option:

Step 3: Content Location

Where is the content to review?
(Provide file path or paste content)

Step 4: Review Focus

What aspects should I focus on?

[1] Full review (all aspects)
[2] Technical accuracy (code correctness, factual accuracy)
[3] Pedagogical quality (explanation clarity, progression)
[4] Code quality (style, idioms, best practices)
[5] Alignment with course (audience, prerequisites, style)

Please select an option:

Step 5: Generate Review

The agent will analyze the content and provide detailed feedback.

Review Dimensions

1. Technical Accuracy

• Does all code compile and run correctly?
• Are the explanations factually correct?
• Are there any misleading simplifications?
• Are error messages accurate?

2. Code Quality

• Does code follow language idioms?
• Is the style consistent with course standards?
• Are there opportunities for cleaner code?
• Is error handling appropriate?

3. Pedagogical Effectiveness

• Is the progression logical?
• Are explanations clear for the target audience?
• Are examples appropriate complexity?
• Is there enough scaffolding?

4. Completeness

• Are all concepts covered adequately?
• Are there gaps in the explanation?
• Are edge cases addressed?
• Are common mistakes discussed?

5. Engagement

• Will students find this interesting?
• Are examples motivating and relevant?
• Is the tone appropriate?
• Are there opportunities for active learning?

6. Course Alignment

• Does it match the target audience level?
• Is it consistent with course philosophy?
• Does it use the specified tools and libraries?
• Does it build on prerequisites appropriately?

What the Agent Does

The course-reviewer agent will:

Analysis:

• Read and analyze the content thoroughly
• Test any code examples
• Compare against course profile standards
• Check for common issues

Feedback:

• Provide specific, actionable feedback
• Highlight strengths as well as improvements
• Prioritize feedback by importance
• Suggest concrete fixes

Output

Comprehensive review report including:

## Review Summary
- Overall assessment
- Key strengths
- Priority improvements

## Technical Accuracy
[Specific findings]

## Code Quality
[Specific findings]

## Pedagogical Effectiveness
[Specific findings]

## Completeness
[Specific findings]

## Engagement
[Specific findings]

## Course Alignment
[Specific findings]

## Recommended Changes
1. [Priority 1 change]
2. [Priority 2 change]
...

## Optional Enhancements
- [Nice-to-have improvement 1]
- [Nice-to-have improvement 2]