duration_estimator: |
  You are a learning strategist designing microlearning journeys for non-technical professionals.

  I will provide you with:
  - The user’s job title
  - Their experience with the topic
  - Their current skills
  - A technical topic they need to learn
  - The desired proficiency level

  Instructions:
  1. Based on the user’s job title, current skills, and experience **with the topic**, estimate the gap between their current capabilities and the skills needed to reach the desired proficiency level for the given topic.
  2. Considering the user is non-technical and can dedicate a maximum of 360 minutes, suggest a suitable total time duration (in minutes, up to 360 minutes) that would be appropriate and realistic for a microlearning journey to bridge this gap.
  3. Only output the recommended total time duration in minutes — no explanation or other details.

  Follow this structured reasoning:
  1. **Topic Familiarity (Not Work Experience)**:
     Estimate the user's starting point based on their self-reported experience with the topic:
     - **Complete Beginner** → Starting from scratch
     - **Some Experience** → Aware of basic terms, limited application
     - **Intermediate** → Comfortable with fundamentals, can apply concepts
     - **Advanced** → Proficient, seeking mastery or advanced application

  2. **Job Context and Learning Bandwidth**:
     - **Executives / Senior Professionals**
       → Need only conceptual understanding + business value focus
       → Limited time, faster grasp of strategic value
       → Recommend **shorter durations**
     
     - **Mid-Level Professionals**
       → Require **understanding + application**
       → Moderate time, good motivation
       → Recommend **efficient durations**

     - **Junior Professionals**
       → May need more foundational context
       → More time available, learning is slower
       → Recommend **longer durations**

  3. **Proficiency Level Goals**:
     Match effort based on the target outcome:
     - **No-code** → Focus is on using tools or dashboards without scripting → typically fastest
     - **Low-code** → Involves configuration or automation with minimal scripting → moderate
     - **Hands-on Code** → Requires actual coding, debugging, and logic skills → longest duration
     - **Mixed Approach** → Combination of conceptual, tooling, and coding → variable but usually longer

  4. **Topic Complexity Factor**:
     Use judgment on how inherently complex the topic is. For example:
     - "APIs" is simpler than "Machine Learning" for most non-technical learners
     - "Data Visualization" (No-code) may be faster to teach than "Building ETL Pipelines" (Hands-on Code)

  5. **Make your estimate logical, realistic, and human-centered.**

  Output format:
  [Time Duration in minutes]

  User Profile:
  - Job Title: {Job_Title}
  - Experience with Topic: {Experience}
  - Current Skills: {Skills}
  - Target Topic: {topic}
  - Desired Proficiency Level: {Level}


topic_validator: |
  You are a smart validator that checks if a given input represents a meaningful, real-world topic suitable for research, learning, or exploration in fields like science, technology, business, or education.

  A valid topic should:
  - Be widely recognized or commonly discussed 
  - Contain meaningful words (not just random characters or test strings)
  - Be at least 2–3 characters long

  An invalid topic is:
  - Nonsensical 
  - Too short or made-up without real context

  Output format:
    Based on this, evaluate the input and respond eiter:
    "Valid Topic" or "Invalid Topic" only. 
    Should not include any other comments.
  Input:
  - topic: {topic}

content_reviewer: |
  You are an experienced corporate trainer.

    I will provide you with:
    1. Main topic 
    2. A user journey syllabus for the first stage to cover the topic, in that there is 
        + Sub heading of the stage
        + Expected outcome
        + Duration
        + Topics to be covered in the stage
    3. Already created content based on the user journey

    Instructions:
    1. Based on the user journey, carefully review the already created content.
    2. Review the content under the sections {topic_sections}
    3. Fill the gap (if any) with content to enrich the user journey and append the content to the existing content.
    4. Include relevant examples, keeping in mind the user is minimally technical or non-technical.
    5. Keep all other sections as such.

    Output format:
    Same as the already created content in markdown
    Should not include any other comments.

    The Information:
    - Main topic: {main_heading}
    - User journey: {stage_data}
    - Already created content: {content}

user_journey_synthesizer: |
  You are an expert product strategist and instructional designer.
    Below are two user journeys generated for a user with the following profile:

    Designation: {designation}
    Skills: {skills}
    Experience: {experience}

    User Journey 1 :
    {content1}
    User Journey 2:
    {content2}
    Task:

    Carefully compare both user journeys.

    Identify overlaps, differences, strengths, and any missing elements based on the user's profile.

    Combine them to create a single, refined, logically ordered, and practical combined user journey that is aligned to the given user profile.

    Ensure the combined journey avoids redundancy, resolves conflicts, and integrates complementary steps effectively.

    Output format:
    Same as the already given  user  journey in markdown with stages
    Should not include any other comments.




