prompt-engineering-patterns

Design and improve prompts for reliable LLM behavior in production workflows.

Updated Apr 5, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/Jhabbig/Habbig --skill prompt-engineering-patterns-jhabbig
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: prompt-engineering-patterns
Source: https://github.com/Jhabbig/Habbig/tree/main/.claude/plugins/wshobson/llm-application-dev/skills/prompt-engineering-patterns
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/Jhabbig/Habbig --skill prompt-engineering-patterns-jhabbig

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill requires numpy, and includes scripts (resource) and references (resource) and assets (resource) components.

What problem does it solve?

This Skill helps you design, debug, and optimize prompts so LLM applications produce more accurate, consistent, and controllable outputs in production.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Few-shot prompt design: Build examples that guide classification, extraction, summarization, and generation tasks.
  • Reasoning and verification patterns: Apply chain-of-thought, self-consistency, and explicit validation steps to improve reliability on complex tasks.
  • Structured outputs and templates: Enforce predictable JSON-like responses, reusable prompt templates, and role-based system instructions for safer automation.
  • Use case: Use this Skill when your assistant keeps drifting off-format, your extraction prompts are inconsistent, or you need a repeatable template for a production LLM workflow.

Quick Start

Use the prompt-engineering-patterns skill to create a robust prompt template for a sentiment classification workflow with clear output constraints and a few relevant examples.

Frequently Asked Questions about prompt-engineering-patterns

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I enforce structured JSON output from LLM responses consistently?

To enforce structured JSON output, design prompts with explicit output constraints, reusable templates, and role-based system instructions. This approach ensures predictable, JSON-like responses for safer automation and reliable production workflows.

What is the best way to stop few-shot extraction prompts from returning inconsistent results?

The best way to fix inconsistent few-shot extraction is applying prompt optimization techniques and explicit validation steps. Building relevant few-shot examples with clear output constraints guides classification and extraction tasks to produce reliable, consistent outputs.

How do I use chain of thought reasoning to improve LLM reliability on complex tasks?

Chain of thought reasoning improves LLM reliability by applying explicit verification steps and self-consistency patterns. These reasoning patterns guide the model through complex tasks, improving accuracy and controllability for production AI workflows.

Does prompt engineering require numpy to design and validate system prompts?

Prompt engineering with this Skill requires numpy as a dependency to support its advanced scripts and components. It provides the computational environment needed to design, validate, and optimize system prompts and reasoning patterns.

Why does my LLM assistant keep drifting off-format during production workflows?

LLM assistants drift off-format when prompts lack explicit validation steps and structured output templates. Designing robust prompt templates with role-based system instructions and clear output constraints enforces predictable, controllable behavior in production workflows.

When should I not use few-shot examples for prompt optimization?

Avoid few-shot examples when tasks require minimal context or when examples introduce bias that degrades output quality. Instead, apply prompt validation and verification techniques to determine if zero-shot reasoning patterns achieve better consistency.