Show HN: A working reference implementation of context engineering

Posted by linsys 3 days ago

Counter45Comment15OpenOriginal

I've been presenting at local meetups about Context Engineering, RAG, Skills, etc.. I even have a vbrownbag coming up on LinkedIn about this topic so I figured I would make a basic example that uses bedrock so I can use it in my talks or vbrownbags. Hopefully it's useful.

Comments

Comment by rao-v 1 day ago

I don’t really think this reflects the current era of challenges?

The “enforcement layer” is the hardest and most important part, and is barely addressed.

- is the answer structurally / syntactically valid?

- is it appropriately grounded and evidenced?

- is it accurate? In what ways does it fall short?

Each of these should be triggering an agent to rework and resubmit etc. or failing that a disclosure to the user about how the answer falls short and should be reviewed / remediated.

This feels like it’s from the era of trying to oneshot a good enough answer.

Comment by linsys 14 hours ago

[flagged]

Comment by dang 14 hours ago

Comment by linsys 13 hours ago

My bad. Won't happen again.

Comment by dang 6 hours ago

Appreciated!

Comment by zihotki 1 day ago

No numbers/measurements/benchmarks and you dare call it "a working" one? Any real proofs that this 'works'?

Comment by linsys 14 hours ago

[dead]

Comment by newsdeskx 1 day ago

enforcement is the hard part. most context engineering stuff describes what should happen, not what actually stops it from happening. curious how your enforcement layer handles runtime checks vs just descriptive ones

Comment by linsys 14 hours ago

[flagged]

Comment by slashdave 1 day ago

> the information an AI system needs to produce accurate ... outputs

I would have stuck a qualifier in there

Comment by r4ge 1 day ago

I feel like AI is going to be doing all the fun stuff and I will just left organizing the data and docs it needs to generate code.

Comment by ayuhito 1 day ago

Welcome to becoming a project manager.

Comment by tmpz22 1 day ago

Putting engineering after a term doesnt make it engineering.

Comment by jryio 1 day ago

Software engineering is certainly not engineering. Even at the highest levels. Real engineering have infinitely more complex interactions in the physical world than symbolic institutions for machines.

Comment by whattheheckheck 1 day ago

Thats right, no need to understand anything other than symbols on a machine. No people involved. No reality to model. No economics to think about. Nothing like real engineering. Thats for the big boys and girls

Comment by slashdave 1 day ago

Probably just using the convention started by the term "prompt engineering", which is forgivable.

Comment by sroussey 1 day ago

not sure i forgive "prompt engineering"

Comment by agent-kay 1 day ago

[flagged]