What the exam covers
CCDV-F reports on a scaled range of 100–1000 with a cut at
720, and its questions are distributed across
8 domains by published weight rather than evenly. Those
weights are the single most useful thing in the exam guide: they tell you
where the marks are, and they rarely match where candidates spend their time.
| Domain | Share of exam | Approx. questions |
| Domain 1 — Agents and Workflows |
14.7% |
8 |
| Domain 2 — Applications and Integration |
33.1% |
18 |
| Domain 3 — Claude Code |
3.1% |
2 |
| Domain 4 — Eval, Testing, and Debugging |
2.6% |
1 |
| Domain 5 — Model Selection and Optimization |
16.8% |
9 |
| Domain 6 — Prompt and Context Engineering |
11.0% |
6 |
| Domain 7 — Security and Safety |
8.1% |
4 |
| Domain 8 — Tools and MCPs |
10.6% |
6 |
See all 24 objectives and their individual weights →
Applications and Integration is the heaviest at
33.1% — roughly
18 of the
53 questions. Weakness there costs more than weakness
anywhere else, which is exactly what a flat percentage score hides and what
a blueprint-weighted estimate surfaces.
Where to start
Three objectives carry the most weight on CCDV-F. Between them they
are worth roughly
13 of the 53 questions:
-
Claude Application Design —
8.6%, about
5 questions
-
Software Engineering Foundations —
7.4%, about
4 questions
-
Technical Fundamentals —
7.3%, about
4 questions
Which is not the same list as the objectives that feel hardest, and that
gap is where study time usually goes missing. A week spent on the topic
that worries you most is a week spent on
9% of the exam at best,
and often on far less.
How we practice it
Our CCDV-F bank holds 406 original items across
24 objectives, each with an explanation and a note on
every option — why the right answer is right, and why each distractor
fails. Items are written against the published objectives. None is recalled
or reproduced from a live exam.
A drill allocates questions by
the published domain weights,
multiplied by how far your measured mastery sits below standard.
So a domain
worth 33% of the
exam that you are weak in dominates your next sitting, while one you have
already mastered drops back to an exposure floor that keeps its estimate
current.
What a question looks like
Taken from the free CCDV-F set, not written for this page —
the correct answer, why it is correct, and a note on why each other option
fails. Scenarios, not recall: nothing here is answerable from a definition.
CCDV-F
Agent Construction with Claude
Using Managed Agents, where do the model, system prompt, and tool definitions belong?
-
A
On each session, so that every run can be configured independently of others
Putting configuration on sessions defeats the versioning the surface exists to provide, and it makes every run a fresh definition.
-
B
On the persisted agent object, which sessions then reference by its stored ID
Correct. Configuration lives on the persisted, versioned agent, and each session pins to it by ID — create the agent once, start a session per run.
-
C
In the first user message of each session, where the model reads them directly
Instructions in a user message are conversation content, not configuration, and they would have to be repeated on every run.
-
D
In the environment definition, alongside the container and networking settings
The environment describes the container and its networking; it does not carry the model or the prompt.
The mandatory flow is agent once, session per run: configuration lives on the versioned agent object and sessions pin to it. Putting configuration on sessions defeats the persistence and versioning the surface exists to provide.
See all 20 free CCDV-F questions →
What you get for free
A 20-item diagnostic for CCDV-F, spread across
objectives rather than taken off the top, so the sample reflects the shape
of the exam. It produces a first readiness estimate and full explanations,
whether or not you go on to buy.
The other Claude certification exams
All four report on the same 100–1000 scale with the same
720 cut, so a readiness estimate means the same thing
whichever you are sitting. What differs is shape: