Agent Skills: Prompt Engineering Guide

Use when "writing prompts", "prompt optimization", "few-shot learning", "chain of thought", or asking about "RAG systems", "agent workflows", "LLM integration", "prompt templates"

UncategorizedID: eyadsibai/ltk/prompt-engineering

Install this agent skill to your local

pnpm dlx add-skill https://github.com/eyadsibai/ltk/tree/HEAD/plugins/ltk-core/skills/prompt-engineering

Skill Files

Browse the full folder contents for prompt-engineering.

Download Skill

Loading file tree…

plugins/ltk-core/skills/prompt-engineering/SKILL.md

Skill Metadata

Name
prompt-engineering
Description
Use when "writing prompts", "prompt optimization", "few-shot learning", "chain of thought", or asking about "RAG systems", "agent workflows", "LLM integration", "prompt templates"

Prompt Engineering Guide

Effective prompts, RAG systems, and agent workflows.

When to Use

  • Optimizing LLM prompts
  • Building RAG systems
  • Designing agent workflows
  • Creating few-shot examples
  • Structuring chain-of-thought reasoning

Prompt Structure

Core Components

| Component | Purpose | Include When | |-----------|---------|--------------| | Role/Context | Set expertise, persona | Complex domain tasks | | Task | Clear instruction | Always | | Format | Output structure | Need structured output | | Examples | Few-shot learning | Pattern demonstration needed | | Constraints | Boundaries, rules | Need to limit scope |

Prompt Patterns

| Pattern | Use Case | Key Concept | |---------|----------|-------------| | Chain of Thought | Complex reasoning | "Think step by step" | | Few-Shot | Pattern learning | 2-5 input/output examples | | Role Playing | Domain expertise | "You are an expert X" | | Structured Output | Parsing needed | Specify JSON/format exactly | | Self-Consistency | Improve accuracy | Generate multiple, vote |


Chain of Thought Variants

| Variant | Description | When to Use | |---------|-------------|-------------| | Standard CoT | "Think step by step" | Math, logic problems | | Zero-Shot CoT | Just add "step by step" | Quick reasoning boost | | Structured CoT | Numbered steps | Complex multi-step | | Self-Ask | Ask sub-questions | Research-style tasks | | Tree of Thought | Explore multiple paths | Creative/open problems |

Key concept: CoT works because it forces the model to show intermediate reasoning, reducing errors in the final answer.


Few-Shot Learning

Example Selection

| Criteria | Why | |----------|-----| | Representative | Cover common cases | | Diverse | Show range of inputs | | Edge cases | Handle boundaries | | Consistent format | Teach output pattern |

Number of Examples

| Count | Trade-off | |-------|-----------| | 0 (zero-shot) | Less context, more creative | | 2-3 | Good balance for most tasks | | 5+ | Complex patterns, use tokens |

Key concept: Examples teach format more than content. The model learns "how" to respond, not "what" facts to include.


RAG System Design

Architecture Flow

Query → Embed → Search → Retrieve → Augment Prompt → Generate

Chunking Strategies

| Strategy | Best For | Trade-off | |----------|----------|-----------| | Fixed size | General documents | May split sentences | | Sentence-based | Precise retrieval | Many small chunks | | Paragraph-based | Context preservation | May be too large | | Semantic | Mixed content | More complex |

Retrieval Quality Factors

| Factor | Impact | |--------|--------| | Chunk size | Too small = no context, too large = noise | | Overlap | Prevents splitting important content | | Metadata filtering | Narrows search space | | Re-ranking | Improves relevance of top-k | | Hybrid search | Combines keyword + semantic |

Key concept: RAG quality depends more on retrieval quality than generation quality. Fix retrieval first.


Agent Patterns

ReAct Pattern

| Step | Description | |------|-------------| | Thought | Reason about what to do | | Action | Call a tool | | Observation | Process tool result | | Repeat | Until task complete |

Tool Design Principles

| Principle | Why | |-----------|-----| | Single purpose | Clear when to use | | Good descriptions | Model selects correctly | | Structured inputs | Reliable parsing | | Informative outputs | Model understands result | | Error messages | Guide retry attempts |


Prompt Optimization

Token Efficiency

| Technique | Savings | |-----------|---------| | Remove redundant instructions | 10-30% | | Use abbreviations in examples | 10-20% | | Compress context with summaries | 50%+ | | Remove verbose explanations | 20-40% |

Quality Improvement

| Technique | Effect | |-----------|--------| | Add specific examples | Reduces errors | | Specify output format | Enables parsing | | Include edge cases | Handles boundaries | | Add confidence scoring | Calibrates uncertainty |


Common Task Patterns

| Task | Key Prompt Elements | |------|---------------------| | Extraction | List fields, specify format (JSON), handle missing | | Classification | List categories, one-shot per category, single answer | | Summarization | Specify length, focus areas, format (bullets/prose) | | Generation | Style guide, length, constraints, examples | | Q&A | Context placement, "based only on context" |


Best Practices

| Practice | Why | |----------|-----| | Be specific and explicit | Reduces ambiguity | | Provide clear examples | Shows expected format | | Specify output format | Enables parsing | | Test with diverse inputs | Find edge cases | | Iterate based on failures | Targeted improvement | | Separate instructions from data | Prevent injection |

Resources