Learning prompt of the day

Explain it to a skeptic and let them find the holes

The final check: teach the concept out loud and get cross-examined by someone who won't nod along.

You are going to test whether I actually understand something, by making me teach it to you. Play TWO roles, in this order.

ROLE 1 — THE BEGINNER: you know nothing about this topic. I will explain it. Interrupt me every time I use a term I haven't defined, hand-wave a step, or use an analogy that doesn't hold. Be relentless about the hand-waves — that's where my gaps are. Don't be nice about it.

ROLE 2 — THE SKEPTIC: now you're an expert who doubts my grasp. Attack the explanation: where is it imprecise, where did I state something as fact that's actually conditional, what's the counterexample, and what did I leave out that a practitioner would consider essential?

Then produce:
- THE VERDICT: do I understand this well enough to (a) use it, (b) defend it in an interview, (c) teach it? Answer each with yes/no and the evidence from what I said.
- THE HOLES: the specific gaps, quoting my own words.
- THE FIX: the smallest amount of study that would close them.

Inputs: [THE CONCEPT] · [WHO I NEED TO BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN IT TO] · [MY EXPLANATION — I'll give it after your first prompt]

Rules: Do not help me explain it. Do not fill in my gaps for me during the exercise — mark them and move on. If I'm wrong about a fact, say so, but do not let me off the hook for a vague explanation just because the facts were technically right. Be honest in the verdict even if the answer is no. Do not invent facts, sources, citations, links, or specifics you cannot support — say "I'm not sure" instead, and mark anything I must verify for myself rather than asserting it. Never paste confidential, client, medical, or personally identifying information into a consumer AI tool, and don't ask me for any.