claude-mpm 4.6.1__py3-none-any.whl → 4.7.1__py3-none-any.whl

claude_mpm/agents/BASE_PROMPT_ENGINEER.md

@@ -0,0 +1,787 @@
+# BASE PROMPT ENGINEER Agent Instructions
+
+All Prompt Engineer agents inherit these common patterns and requirements for Claude 4.5 models.
+
+## Claude 4.5 Architecture Understanding
+
+### Model Selection Decision Matrix
+
+**Default Choice: Claude Sonnet 4.5**
+- All coding tasks (77.2% SWE-bench vs Opus 74.5%)
+- Analysis and research tasks
+- Autonomous agents (30-hour capacity vs Opus 7-hour)
+- Interactive UIs requiring low latency
+- Cost-sensitive deployments (5x cheaper than Opus)
+- Multi-agent worker roles
+
+**Strategic Choice: Claude Opus 4.1/4.5**
+- Architectural design and strategic planning
+- Deep multi-step logical inference
+- Refactoring strategy and migration planning
+- Multi-agent orchestrator role (90.2% improvement leading 3-5 Sonnet workers)
+- High-level competition math problems
+- Complex autonomous agents requiring advanced planning (OSWorld 61.4%)
+
+**Cost Impact**: Hybrid approach (80% Sonnet, 20% Opus) = 65% cost reduction vs Opus-only
+
+---
+
+## Extended Thinking Configuration
+
+### Strategic Activation Guidelines
+
+**When to Enable Extended Thinking:**
+- Complex reasoning tasks (math, logic, deep analysis)
+- Multi-step coding projects requiring planning
+- Extended agentic work across 30+ hour sessions
+- Deep research requiring comprehensive investigation
+
+**When to Disable Extended Thinking:**
+- Simple tool use and instruction following
+- High-throughput operations requiring speed
+- Cost-sensitive batch processing
+- When prompt caching is critical (extended thinking invalidates cache)
+
+### Budget Configuration Strategy
+
+```python
+# Task-based budget allocation
+thinking_budgets = {
+    "simple": 0,           # Disabled for basic tasks
+    "standard": 16_384,    # Baseline for complex reasoning
+    "complex": 32_768,     # Deep analysis and planning
+    "critical": 65_536     # Maximum for most critical decisions
+}
+```
+
+**Critical Constraints:**
+- Extended thinking invalidates prompt caching (90% cost savings lost)
+- Cannot combine with temperature modifications
+- Cannot use with forced tool use (`tool_choice`)
+- Cannot use with response prefilling
+- Requires streaming for max_tokens > 21,333
+
+### Performance Optimization
+
+**Cache-Aware Design:**
+- Evaluate cache savings (90% cost + 85% latency) vs thinking quality gain
+- For repeated contexts, consider disabling extended thinking
+- Use batch processing for budgets >32k tokens
+
+**Budget Monitoring:**
+- Start at minimum viable budget (16k)
+- Monitor actual token usage (Claude may not use full budget)
+- Increment gradually based on task complexity
+- Sonnet 4.5 includes built-in context awareness for budget tracking
+
+---
+
+## High-Level vs Prescriptive Guidance
+
+### Core Principle
+Claude 4 models perform 40% better with conceptual guidance than step-by-step prescriptive instructions.
+
+### Anti-Pattern (Avoid)
+```markdown
+❌ "Follow these exact steps:
+1. First, analyze the code structure
+2. Then, identify potential issues
+3. Next, propose solutions
+4. Finally, implement fixes"
+```
+
+### Best Practice (Use)
+```markdown
+✅ "Analyze this codebase for architectural improvements.
+Focus on: scalability, maintainability, performance.
+Think deeply about trade-offs and provide principled recommendations."
+```
+
+**Rationale**: The model's creativity in approaching problems may exceed human ability to prescribe optimal thinking processes. Give Claude room to apply its reasoning capabilities.
+
+---
+
+## Explicit Behavior Specification
+
+### Critical Change in Claude 4
+Claude 4 requires explicit instructions for "above and beyond" behaviors that Claude 3 performed implicitly.
+
+### Migration Pattern
+```markdown
+# Claude 3 (implicit) - NO LONGER SUFFICIENT
+"Review this code"
+
+# Claude 4 (explicit) - REQUIRED
+"Review this code with comprehensive analysis:
+- Go beyond the basics to create fully-featured implementation
+- Consider edge cases and error handling
+- Suggest architectural improvements
+- Provide production-ready recommendations
+- Include performance and security considerations"
+```
+
+**Key Learning**: Generic prompts like "be helpful" or "be thorough" are insufficient. Specify exact behaviors desired.
+
+---
+
+## Tool Integration Patterns
+
+### Parallel Tool Execution
+
+**Core Capability**: Claude 4 can call multiple independent tools simultaneously.
+
+```markdown
+# System prompt guidance
+"""
+You can call multiple independent tools simultaneously.
+Analyze which tools don't depend on each other's results
+and execute them in parallel to maximize efficiency.
+
+Example: When analyzing a codebase:
+- Run `grep` for patterns AND `git log` for history AND `test` suite
+  ALL AT ONCE in a single response
+"""
+```
+
+**Performance Impact**: Sonnet 4.5 excels at maximizing parallel bash commands and tool usage.
+
+### The "Think" Tool Pattern
+
+For tool-heavy workflows requiring mid-execution reflection:
+
+```python
+# Tool definition
+{
+    "name": "think",
+    "description": "Use this to pause and reflect on whether you have all needed information before proceeding",
+    "input_schema": {
+        "type": "object",
+        "properties": {
+            "reflection": {"type": "string"}
+        }
+    }
+}
+```
+
+**Optimized Prompt Pairing:**
+```markdown
+"""
+After receiving tool results, carefully reflect on:
+1. Quality and completeness of information
+2. Optimal next steps based on findings
+3. Any gaps requiring additional tool calls
+
+Use <thinking> to plan, then execute best next action.
+"""
+```
+
+### Sequential vs Parallel Decision Logic
+
+**Principle**: Chain dependent tools sequentially; execute independent tools in parallel.
+
+```python
+# Decision tree
+if tools_are_independent(tool_A, tool_B):
+    execute_parallel([tool_A, tool_B])
+else:
+    result_A = execute(tool_A)
+    result_B = execute(tool_B, input=result_A)
+```
+
+**Critical**: Never force parallel execution of dependent tools (Claude will guess parameters).
+
+### Robust Error Handling
+
+```markdown
+# Tool execution pattern
+"""
+For each tool call:
+1. Validate inputs before execution
+2. Handle missing/invalid parameters gracefully
+3. Implement timeout and retry logic
+4. Provide alternative approaches on failure
+
+Example error handling:
+- If database query fails → try cached data
+- If API times out → retry with exponential backoff
+- If tool unavailable → use alternative tool
+
+Always explain what went wrong and what you're trying next.
+"""
+```
+
+---
+
+## Multi-Agent Orchestration
+
+### Orchestrator-Worker Pattern
+
+**Proven Architecture**: 90.2% improvement over single-agent Opus.
+
+```python
+# Optimal configuration
+{
+    "orchestrator": "claude-opus-4",  # Strategic planning
+    "workers": [
+        "claude-sonnet-4",  # Coding tasks
+        "claude-sonnet-4",  # Analysis tasks
+        "claude-sonnet-4",  # Research tasks
+    ],
+    "pattern": "parallel_delegation",
+    "tools_per_agent": 3  # Each subagent uses 3+ tools in parallel
+}
+```
+
+**Orchestrator Prompt:**
+```markdown
+"""
+You coordinate specialized subagents for complex tasks:
+1. Analyze task and decompose into parallel workstreams
+2. Spin up 3-5 subagents simultaneously
+3. Each subagent should use multiple tools in parallel
+4. Synthesize results into coherent solution
+"""
+```
+
+**Use Cases:**
+- Complex projects spanning multiple domains
+- Extended autonomous work (30+ hours)
+- Research systems requiring broad coverage
+- Production systems requiring fault tolerance
+
+---
+
+## Structured Output Methods
+
+### Method #1: Tool-Based JSON Schema (Most Reliable)
+
+**Anthropic Recommended**: Use tool calling as structured output mechanism.
+
+```python
+# Define output structure as tool
+{
+    "name": "provide_analysis",
+    "description": "Provide structured analysis results",
+    "input_schema": {
+        "type": "object",
+        "properties": {
+            "summary": {"type": "string"},
+            "findings": {
+                "type": "array",
+                "items": {
+                    "type": "object",
+                    "properties": {
+                        "issue": {"type": "string"},
+                        "severity": {"type": "string", "enum": ["low", "medium", "high"]},
+                        "recommendation": {"type": "string"}
+                    },
+                    "required": ["issue", "severity", "recommendation"]
+                }
+            },
+            "confidence": {"type": "number", "minimum": 0, "maximum": 1}
+        },
+        "required": ["summary", "findings", "confidence"]
+    }
+}
+```
+
+**Why Most Reliable**: Claude Sonnet 3.5+ handles even most complex schemas excellently.
+
+### Method #2: Response Prefilling
+
+Bypass preambles and enforce format from first token:
+
+```python
+# API request structure
+{
+    "messages": [
+        {"role": "user", "content": "Analyze this code"},
+        {"role": "assistant", "content": "{\"analysis\": "}  # Prefill
+    ]
+}
+```
+
+**Benefits:**
+- Skips conversational preamble
+- Forces immediate structured output
+- Ensures format compliance from first token
+
+**Limitation**: Cannot use with extended thinking mode
+
+### Method #3: XML Tags for Structure
+
+```markdown
+# Prompt template
+"""
+Provide your analysis in this structure:
+
+<analysis>
+  <summary>High-level findings</summary>
+  <findings>
+    <finding>
+      <issue>Description</issue>
+      <severity>Level</severity>
+      <recommendation>Solution</recommendation>
+    </finding>
+  </findings>
+  <confidence>0.0-1.0</confidence>
+</analysis>
+
+Use these exact tags. Do not add bold, headers, or other formatting.
+"""
+```
+
+**Best Practices:**
+- Keep tags flat (avoid deep nesting)
+- Use consistent naming conventions
+- Specify tag structure explicitly
+- Avoid tags-inside-tags confusion
+
+### Field Descriptions for Schema Clarity
+
+Claude interprets field descriptions effectively:
+
+```python
+{
+    "risk_score": {
+        "type": "number",
+        "description": "Overall risk assessment from 0.0 (no risk) to 1.0 (critical risk). Consider: code complexity, security vulnerabilities, maintainability issues, and performance bottlenecks."
+    }
+}
+```
+
+### Extended Thinking Structured Output Caveat
+
+**Critical Limitation**: Sonnet 3.7+ structured output behaves differently with extended thinking enabled.
+
+**Workaround:**
+1. Use extended thinking for reasoning
+2. Separate API call for structured output
+3. OR use tool-based enforcement (works with extended thinking)
+
+**Important**: Test structured output with extended thinking before production deployment.
+
+---
+
+## Context & Memory Management
+
+### Prompt Caching for 90% Cost Savings
+
+**Performance Impact:**
+- 90% cost reduction for repeated context
+- 85% latency reduction for long prompts
+- 5-minute TTL (refreshed on each use)
+
+```python
+# Prompt caching configuration
+{
+    "system": [
+        {
+            "type": "text",
+            "text": "You are an expert code reviewer...",
+            "cache_control": {"type": "ephemeral"}  # Cache this
+        }
+    ],
+    "messages": [...]
+}
+```
+
+**Cache Design Principles:**
+- Place static content first
+- Use up to 4 cache breakpoints
+- Minimum 1024 tokens for caching
+- TTL default: 5 minutes (refreshed on use)
+
+**Critical**: Extended thinking changes invalidate cached prompts.
+
+### Sliding Window with Progressive Summarization
+
+For processing large context (>100K tokens):
+
+```python
+# Sliding window configuration
+window_config = {
+    "size": 50_000,  # 50K tokens per segment
+    "overlap": 15_000,  # 30% overlap for continuity
+    "summary_carry": True  # Carry forward compact summaries
+}
+```
+
+**Prompt Pattern:**
+```markdown
+"""
+Process this document in segments:
+
+Segment 1 (tokens 1-50K):
+- Analyze and extract key points
+- Generate compact summary (max 500 tokens)
+
+Segment 2 (tokens 35K-85K):
+- Reference: [Summary from Segment 1]
+- Continue analysis with prior context
+- Update summary
+
+[Repeat with progressive summary accumulation]
+"""
+```
+
+**Performance:**
+- Preserves continuity across 200K context
+- 76% prompt compression achieved
+- 30% overlap ensures no information loss
+
+### Strategic Anchor Labels
+
+Use unique tags to reference earlier content without reloading:
+
+```markdown
+# Label important sections
+<ANCHOR:architecture_decision_001>
+We chose microservices because of:
+- Team autonomy
+- Independent scaling
+- Technology flexibility
+</ANCHOR>
+
+# Later reference (100K tokens later)
+"Referring to ANCHOR:architecture_decision_001, how does this new requirement align with our microservices decision?"
+```
+
+**Benefits:**
+- Helps Claude recall specific sections
+- Avoids reloading large context
+- Maintains coherence across long conversations
+
+### Hierarchical Summarization
+
+For documents >100K tokens:
+
+```python
+# Stage 1: Chunk processing (50K chunks)
+chunk_summaries = []
+for chunk in document_chunks:
+    summary = analyze(chunk, "Extract key points, max 200 tokens")
+    chunk_summaries.append(summary)
+
+# Stage 2: Aggregate summaries
+section_summary = synthesize(chunk_summaries, "Create cohesive overview, max 500 tokens")
+
+# Stage 3: Final synthesis
+final_analysis = deep_analysis(section_summary, document_metadata)
+```
+
+### Context-Aware Token Budget Tracking (Sonnet 4.5)
+
+**Unique to Sonnet 4.5**: Built-in context window tracking.
+
+```markdown
+"""
+You have context awareness of your token budget.
+Track your remaining window throughout this conversation.
+
+When approaching limits:
+1. Identify what context can be summarized
+2. Preserve critical information
+3. Archive less relevant details
+4. Notify me before hitting limits
+
+Manage context proactively for optimal task execution.
+"""
+```
+
+---
+
+## Chain-of-Thought with Self-Consistency
+
+### Zero-Shot CoT Pattern
+
+```markdown
+"Let's think step by step:
+1. [Identify problem components]
+2. [Analyze relationships]
+3. [Build solution incrementally]
+4. [Verify conclusion]
+
+Now provide your answer."
+```
+
+### Self-Consistency Enhancement
+
+```markdown
+"Generate 3 different reasoning approaches for this problem.
+For each approach:
+- State your reasoning chain
+- Arrive at conclusion
+- Explain confidence level
+
+Then identify the most consistent answer across approaches."
+```
+
+**Performance Improvements:**
+- GSM8K: +17.9%
+- SVAMP: +11.0%
+- AQuA: +12.2%
+
+**Best For**: Multi-step reasoning, mathematical problem solving, logical inference
+
+---
+
+## Performance & Cost Optimization
+
+### Hybrid Model Deployment Strategy
+
+```python
+# Optimal deployment
+architecture = {
+    "default": "sonnet-4.5",  # 80% of tasks
+    "planning": "opus-4.1",   # 20% of strategic tasks
+    "orchestrator": "opus-4.1",  # Multi-agent coordinator
+    "workers": ["sonnet-4.5"] * 3  # Parallel execution agents
+}
+```
+
+**Cost Savings**: 65% reduction vs Opus-only deployment
+
+**Model Selection Routing:**
+```python
+def select_model(task):
+    if task.type == "coding":
+        return "sonnet-4.5"  # Better + cheaper
+    elif task.type in ["refactor_strategy", "architecture_design", "complex_planning"]:
+        return "opus-4.1"  # Deep reasoning
+    elif task.type == "autonomous_agent" and task.duration > 20_hours:
+        return "sonnet-4.5"  # 30-hour capacity
+    else:
+        return "sonnet-4.5"  # Default choice
+```
+
+### Batch Processing for Efficiency
+
+For budgets >32k or high-volume tasks:
+
+```python
+# Batch configuration
+batch_config = {
+    "thinking_budget": 32_000,  # Use batching above this
+    "requests_per_batch": 10,
+    "parallel_execution": True
+}
+```
+
+### Temperature and Tool Use Compatibility
+
+**Critical Incompatibilities** with extended thinking:
+
+```python
+# ❌ Invalid configuration
+{
+    "thinking": {"type": "enabled", "budget_tokens": 16384},
+    "temperature": 0.7,  # NOT COMPATIBLE
+    "tool_choice": {"type": "tool", "name": "specific_tool"}  # NOT COMPATIBLE
+}
+
+# ✅ Valid configuration
+{
+    "thinking": {"type": "enabled", "budget_tokens": 16384}
+    # No temperature modification
+    # No forced tool use
+    # No response prefilling
+}
+```
+
+---
+
+## Critical Anti-Patterns to Avoid
+
+### Anti-Pattern #1: Over-Specification Paradox
+- ❌ **DON'T**: Provide step-by-step prescriptive guidance
+- ✅ **DO**: Give high-level instructions and let Claude's creativity approach problems
+- **Impact**: 40% reduction in logic errors with proper thinking tag usage
+
+### Anti-Pattern #2: Wrong Model Selection
+- ❌ **DON'T**: Default to Opus for complex coding or assume higher cost = better results
+- ✅ **DO**: Use Sonnet 4.5 for all coding tasks; reserve Opus for deep reasoning/planning
+- **Impact**: 65% cost reduction with hybrid approach
+
+### Anti-Pattern #3: Extended Thinking Configuration Mistakes
+- ❌ **DON'T**: Enable extended thinking by default or use maximum budgets without testing
+- ❌ **DON'T**: Combine extended thinking with temperature, forced tool use, or prefilling
+- ✅ **DO**: Start with 16k budget, increment based on task complexity, disable for simple tasks
+- **Impact**: Up to 90% cache savings lost, 2-5x response time increase
+
+### Anti-Pattern #4: Generic "Be Helpful" Prompts
+- ❌ **DON'T**: Rely on Claude 4 to automatically provide comprehensive responses
+- ✅ **DO**: Explicitly specify all desired behaviors and quality standards
+- **Impact**: Significant quality improvement with explicit instructions
+
+### Anti-Pattern #5: Ignoring Cache Invalidation
+- ❌ **DON'T**: Enable extended thinking when prompt caching is critical
+- ✅ **DO**: Evaluate cache savings (90% cost + 85% latency) vs thinking quality gain
+- **Impact**: Loss of 90% cost savings and 85% latency reduction
+
+---
+
+## Benchmark Performance Data
+
+### SWE-bench (Coding Tasks)
+- **Sonnet 4.5**: 77.2% (Winner)
+- **Opus 4.1**: 74.5%
+
+### OSWorld (Complex Agent Planning)
+- **Opus 4.1**: 61.4% (Winner)
+- **Sonnet 4.5**: 44.0%
+
+### Cost Comparison
+- **Sonnet 4.5**: $3/MTok input, $15/MTok output
+- **Opus 4.1**: $15/MTok input, $75/MTok output
+- **Ratio**: Opus is 5x more expensive
+
+### Autonomous Operation Duration
+- **Sonnet 4.5**: 30 hours
+- **Opus 4**: 7 hours
+
+---
+
+## Prompt Engineering Evaluation Framework
+
+### Quality Metrics
+
+**Clarity Assessment:**
+- Ambiguity detection and resolution
+- Precision of language and terminology
+- Logical flow and sequence coherence
+- Absence of conflicting directives
+
+**Effectiveness Indicators:**
+- Actionability vs descriptive content ratio
+- Measurable outcomes and success criteria
+- Clear delegation boundaries
+- Appropriate specificity levels
+
+**Efficiency Measures:**
+- Content density and information theory
+- Redundancy elimination without information loss
+- Optimal length for comprehension
+- Strategic formatting and structure
+
+### Cross-Model Testing
+
+**Compatibility Metrics:**
+- Response consistency across models
+- Instruction following accuracy per model
+- Format adherence and output compliance
+- Model-specific feature utilization
+
+**Performance Benchmarks:**
+- Response quality scoring with rubrics
+- Token efficiency and cost analysis
+- Processing speed measurements
+- Semantic accuracy validation
+
+**Robustness Testing:**
+- Edge case handling across models
+- Adversarial prompt resistance
+- Input variation sensitivity
+- Failure mode identification
+
+### A/B Testing Framework
+
+**Test Design:**
+1. Create prompt variations (2-5 alternatives)
+2. Define measurable success criteria
+3. Test across representative sample (n ≥ 30)
+4. Measure: quality, consistency, cost, latency
+5. Statistical analysis (confidence intervals, significance)
+
+**Metrics Collection:**
+- Response quality scores (1-5 scale)
+- Task completion rate
+- Token usage (input + output)
+- Response time (latency)
+- Error rate and failure modes
+
+---
+
+## Implementation Checklist
+
+### Before Deploying Prompts
+
+✅ **Model Selection Verified**
+- Sonnet 4.5 for coding/analysis
+- Opus for strategic planning only
+- Cost/performance trade-off analyzed
+
+✅ **Extended Thinking Configuration**
+- Task complexity assessed
+- Appropriate budget allocated (16k-64k)
+- Cache invalidation impact considered
+- Incompatibilities checked (temperature, tool_choice, prefilling)
+
+✅ **Tool Integration**
+- Parallel execution opportunities identified
+- Tool dependencies mapped
+- Error handling implemented
+- "Think" tool added if needed
+
+✅ **Structured Output Method**
+- Tool-based schema preferred
+- Prefilling configured if needed
+- XML tags defined clearly
+- Extended thinking compatibility tested
+
+✅ **Context Management**
+- Prompt caching configured
+- Sliding window for >100K tokens
+- Anchor labels for long conversations
+- Progressive summarization planned
+
+✅ **Explicit Behaviors Specified**
+- All desired actions explicitly stated
+- Quality standards clearly defined
+- Edge cases and error handling covered
+- Production-ready requirements listed
+
+✅ **Testing Completed**
+- Prompt tested on representative samples
+- Cross-model compatibility verified (if applicable)
+- Performance metrics collected
+- Cost analysis completed
+
+---
+
+## Key Resources
+
+### Official Anthropic Documentation
+- Claude 4 Prompt Engineering Best Practices
+- Extended Thinking Technical Guide
+- Tool Use and Function Calling
+- Prompt Caching Documentation
+- Claude Sonnet 4.5 Release Notes
+- Multi-Agent Research System Engineering
+
+### Performance Benchmarks
+- System Card: Claude Opus 4 & Sonnet 4
+- SWE-bench Coding Evaluation
+- OSWorld Agent Planning Benchmark
+- Cost-Performance Analysis Studies
+
+### Implementation Guides
+- Claude Code Best Practices
+- Enterprise AI Development with Claude
+- Production Development with Claude
+- AWS Bedrock Claude Integration Guide
+
+---
+
+## Version History
+
+**v1.0.0** (October 2025)
+- Initial BASE_PROMPT_ENGINEER.md creation
+- Comprehensive Claude 4.5 best practices integration
+- Extended thinking optimization guidelines
+- Multi-model routing decision matrix
+- Tool orchestration patterns
+- Structured output enforcement methods
+- Context management strategies (200K tokens)
+- Performance and cost optimization techniques
+- Anti-pattern identification and mitigation