CCAO-F Readiness Assessment
Part of the CCAO-F track. Objective IDs and domain weights come from registry.yaml.
This is a self-assessment tool. It cannot predict your official result.
Use this page three times: at the start (baseline), halfway through your preparation, and about a week before your
exam. Copy the tables into your own notes and fill them in.
Confidence scale
| Score |
Meaning |
| 1 |
I do not know what this objective means |
| 2 |
I understand it when I read about it, but could not apply it |
| 3 |
I can apply it in a familiar situation with some effort |
| 4 |
I apply it routinely at work and can explain the reasoning |
| 5 |
I could teach it, including edge cases and common traps |
Be honest: an inflated score only hides a gap until exam day. For each objective, the "evidence" column describes what
you should be able to show if you rate yourself 4 or higher.
Domain 1 · Prompting and Task Execution (14%)
| ID |
Objective (paraphrased) |
Evidence for a 4+ |
Start |
Mid |
Final |
| CCAO-F-1.1 |
Write effective prompts for business and technical tasks |
You routinely include goal, context, audience, constraints, format and success criteria |
|
|
|
| CCAO-F-1.2 |
Decompose complex requests into sub-tasks |
You chained a multi-step task and caught an error between steps (Exercise 1.2) |
|
|
|
| CCAO-F-1.3 |
Iterate on prompts to improve quality |
You can show a prompt history where each change addressed a named problem |
|
|
|
| CCAO-F-1.4 |
Adapt strategy to task type |
You can state the key prompt moves for analysis, research, drafting and brainstorming |
|
|
|
Domain 2 · Output Evaluation and Validation (21%)
| ID |
Objective (paraphrased) |
Evidence for a 4+ |
Start |
Mid |
Final |
| CCAO-F-2.1 |
Evaluate accuracy and completeness |
You check outputs against the brief and all sources, item by item |
|
|
|
| CCAO-F-2.2 |
Spot hallucinations, inconsistencies and bias |
You found unsupported claims in Exercise 2.1 and can list the warning signs |
|
|
|
| CCAO-F-2.3 |
Apply fact-checking and validation |
You verify against primary sources and open citations, never relying on self-rated confidence |
|
|
|
| CCAO-F-2.4 |
Decide when human review is needed |
You built a risk-based review plan (Exercise 2.2) using the six factors |
|
|
|
| CCAO-F-2.5 |
Edit, adapt and compare outputs for an audience |
You produce audience versions without factual drift and compare against set criteria |
|
|
|
| CCAO-F-2.6 |
Curate information and choose formats |
You choose between inline, artifact and structured data based on the next step |
|
|
|
Domain 3 · Product and Model Selection (12%)
| ID |
Objective (paraphrased) |
Evidence for a 4+ |
Start |
Mid |
Final |
| CCAO-F-3.1 |
Choose the right product feature |
You match scenario signals to Projects, research, web search, artifacts, connectors, Skills, memory |
|
|
|
| CCAO-F-3.2 |
Differentiate Haiku, Sonnet and Opus |
You can describe each tier's position and typical tasks |
|
|
|
| CCAO-F-3.3 |
Match model to cost, speed and quality |
You compared models on real tasks (Exercise 3.2) and picked the cheapest adequate one |
|
|
|
| CCAO-F-3.4 |
Manage context limits and memory |
You know when to restart, summarise or persist, and where each kind of information belongs |
|
|
|
Domain 4 · Workflow Integration and Solution Design (16%)
| ID |
Objective (paraphrased) |
Evidence for a 4+ |
Start |
Mid |
Final |
| CCAO-F-4.1 |
Analyse requirements and use cases |
You screened use cases on frequency, checkability, risk and data |
|
|
|
| CCAO-F-4.2 |
Use Claude for research, planning and process optimisation |
You produced a process map with bottlenecks and options (Exercise 4.2) |
|
|
|
| CCAO-F-4.3 |
Support solution design and iteration |
You prototyped and iterated a small tool against test inputs (Exercise 4.3) |
|
|
|
| CCAO-F-4.4 |
Integrate Claude into workflows |
You can distinguish augment, automate and redesign, and place the human checkpoint |
|
|
|
| CCAO-F-4.5 |
Communicate value and limitations |
You wrote a balanced one-page brief with evidence, failures and controls |
|
|
|
Domain 5 · Configuration and Knowledge Management (12%)
| ID |
Objective (paraphrased) |
Evidence for a 4+ |
Start |
Mid |
Final |
| CCAO-F-5.1 |
Configure Projects with instructions and knowledge |
You built and tested a Project (Exercise 5.1) |
|
|
|
| CCAO-F-5.2 |
Manage knowledge and connectors |
You can explain upload versus connector, per-user access and admin controls |
|
|
|
| CCAO-F-5.3 |
Write effective system-level instructions |
You can write the six-part instruction template from memory |
|
|
|
| CCAO-F-5.4 |
Maintain configurations over time |
Your Project has an owner, review date, change log and test set |
|
|
|
Domain 6 · Governance, Risk, and Responsible Use (15%)
| ID |
Objective (paraphrased) |
Evidence for a 4+ |
Start |
Mid |
Final |
| CCAO-F-6.1 |
Distinguish appropriate from inappropriate use |
You triaged ten uses with controls or alternatives (Exercise 6.2) |
|
|
|
| CCAO-F-6.2 |
Apply data-sensitivity, regulatory and privacy considerations |
You de-identified a dataset before analysis (Exercise 6.1) |
|
|
|
| CCAO-F-6.3 |
Follow AI policy and governance |
You have a one-page summary of your organisation's AI policy and know who to ask |
|
|
|
| CCAO-F-6.4 |
Understand ethical implications |
You can discuss fairness, transparency, accountability and over-reliance with examples |
|
|
|
Domain 7 · Troubleshooting and Optimization (10%)
| ID |
Objective (paraphrased) |
Evidence for a 4+ |
Start |
Mid |
Final |
| CCAO-F-7.1 |
Diagnose and fix poor outputs |
You fixed three injected faults by symptom → cause → fix (Exercise 7.1) |
|
|
|
| CCAO-F-7.2 |
Adjust based on feedback and results |
You ran a feedback loop with before-and-after comparison (Exercise 7.2) |
|
|
|
| CCAO-F-7.3 |
Optimise workflows |
You completed an efficiency audit with quality safeguards (Exercise 7.3) |
|
|
|
Weighted readiness score (optional)
To see where effort pays off most, compute a weighted average:
- For each domain, average your objective scores.
- Multiply each domain average by its weight (14, 21, 12, 16, 12, 15, 10), add them and divide by 100.
A low score in Domain 2 (21%) costs more than the same score in Domain 7 (10%). Prioritise accordingly, but do not
ignore any domain: every domain contributes items.
Readiness criteria
You are likely ready to book (or to keep your booking) when all of the following hold:
Important: unofficial scores, including this repository's mock exams, practice questions and any third-party
tests, do not equal the official scaled score. The official exam uses a scaled score on a 100–1,000 scale set by
a standard-setting study (see registry.yaml); how raw performance converts to that scale is not
published. This repository's mock engine reports raw percent-correct and scores multiple-response items
all-or-nothing as an explicit assumption. Use unofficial results to find weak areas and track trends, never to
predict a pass.
Next steps by result
| Your situation |
What to do next |
| Several objectives at 1–2 |
Work through the matching study guide sections and module pages before attempting more questions |
| Objectives at 3 but mock scores uneven by domain |
Do the practical exercises for weak domains; read decision-scenarios.md and common-misconceptions.md |
| Domain 2 or 6 weak |
These are judgement-heavy: practise verification and data-minimisation on real (approved) work every day for a week |
| Good knowledge but running out of time |
Practise timed sets of 15 items in 30 minutes; apply the pacing checkpoints in exam-day.md |
| All criteria met |
Book the exam; in the final week use revision-notes.md and the flashcards |
| Exam on or after 2026-12-07 |
Check the updated official guide (due 2026-11-17) for changed objectives and re-rate yourself against it |
Reassess
After each study block, rerun the relevant domain table. Record the date and your scores so you can see trends. If an
objective will not move past 3 after two attempts, try a different resource: a hands-on exercise, a decision scenario, a
module page or explaining the topic to a colleague.