Strategy, Insights & Essays from Walter Reid

Walter Reid’s Amazing STAR-based AI Prompt Using Claude.ai

Here’s a STAR-based AI prompt I ran on a fake product manager resume:
🔗 Claude.ai: Improving Jamie’s Resume

It didn’t just rewrite the bullets — it asked smart clarifying questions, identified hidden risks, and showed how to actually showcase impact. No buzzword soup. No “slop.”

I did most of the hard work for you. But more importantly — I want to show you how to do this for yourself.

Not for money.
Not as a service.

Im doing it because I believe learning how to use AI well is one of the most valuable things you can do right now — and most people are only scratching the surface.

So if you’re updating your resume, or curious how to write anything really with AI, DM me (or comment below)

Tell me what you’re working on. I’ll help (because i want to)

Worst case: you learn a new skill.
Best case: you land a better role, and I make a new connection.

Win-win.

💬 Reddit Communities:

Expert Prompting and the MYTH about AI Consulting

The biggest myth in AI consulting? That typing “Act as a strategist. Create a SWOT.” is the same as delivering a strategy.

It’s not. That’s just reading the dashboard lights. The real work is the repair.

Here’s the paradox: We can craft a brilliant prompt that generates a slick framework… but once perfected, that prompt is a commodity anyone can copy.

The differentiation lives in the work around the prompt:

Before → Curation: real inputs from stakeholders, proprietary data, market nuance.
After → Interrogation: pushing the AI’s draft through real consulting filters:
– Diagnosis: what’s actually broken?
– Cost: what will it take to fix (money, time, politics)?
– Feasibility: can this org even pull it off?

A great prompt proves you know which questions to ask.
The moat is having the rigor (and courage) to challenge the answers.

The flood of easy AI content is creating “AI Workslop.” The only way past it isn’t better prompts — it’s better decisions.

How are you using AI as a first mile, not the finish line?

💬 Reddit Communities:

r/UnderstoodAI – Philosophical & practical AI alignment

r/AIPlaybook – Tactical frameworks & prompt design tools

r/BeUnderstood – AI guidance & human-AI communication

r/AdvancedLLM – CrewAI, LangChain, and agentic workflows

r/PromptPlaybook – Advanced prompting & context control

VSCode and Cursor aren’t just for developers. Building & Writing Like a BOSS

Newsflash: Cursor isn’t just for developers. I’ve been using it as a context vault for everything I’m building & writing…NOT just code.

Outlines, characters, research all alive between sessions. No more context rot or pasting large chuncks of writing into a small prompt window that’s forgotten 5 minutes later.

Honestly here is just a short list of things you can do with Cursor:
•   ✍️ Write your 100-page novel with a dedicated assistant who already knows your plot, characters, tone.
•   📊 Build strategy decks where every amendment, every critical talking point, is preserved in context. No need to pause and recollect.
•   🗂️ Manage research & knowledge bases across topics. Weeks later, your AI will remember what you meant by “Plan A vs Plan B.”
•   🎮 My personal favorite – Design systems, games, products with shared reference docs so changes in one place reflect everywhere.

Here’s a VERY quick 2-step “how to start your novel, research, or even a PRD with really solid context”:
1. Create your reference docs in Cursor (traditionally that’s a “Claude.md”.
•   Include references to Character sheets: who people are, what their motives are
•   World / setting / tone doc: what style you’re going for, key rules
•   Plot outline: high-level beats
2. Instantiate your AI assistant using those docs as preloaded context
•   When you prompt, include reference links or identifiers rather than re-stating everything
•   As you write, update the docs in Cursor and let the assistant refer back. Treat it like shared memory

If you like thinking about how we can make communication easier with AI. Check out my “Designed to Be Understood” series where I explore this stuff in depth.

💬 Reddit Communities:

How to Write a $180K marketing strategy for 6 business locations in your area

Just helped create a $180K marketing strategy for 6 business locations in Westchester County — full competitive analysis, hyper-local targeting, community partnerships, and a week-by-week plan the teams can actually run.

Here’s the thing: small businesses need this level of rigor too — but not the $15K+ price tag.

So I built Nucleus — putting your small business at the center of your local market.

What makes it different:
🎯 Real market research (competitor analysis, customer demographics, local opportunities)
✅ Execution-ready plans (weekly milestones, owners, and budget by channel)
🔧 Industry-specific guidance tailored to your business type

I’m testing with 10 small businesses — full strategy (normally ~$2K) free during the pilot.

Comment “NUCLEUS” or DM your city + industry + budget range to get details.

hashtag#SmallBusinessMarketing hashtag#LocalMarketing hashtag#MarketingStrategy

💬 Reddit Communities:

Prompt Engineering: Making Viral Posts on LinkedIn Ethically

Every other day I see the same post: 👉 “Google, Harvard, and Microsoft are offering FREE AI courses.”

And every day I think: do we really need the 37th recycled list?

So instead of just pasting another one… I decided to “write” the ultimate prompt that anyone can use to make their own viral “Free AI Courses” post. 🧩

⚡ So… Here’s the Prompt (Copy -> Paste -> Flex):



You are writing a LinkedIn post that intentionally acknowledges the recycled nature of “Free AI Courses” list posts, but still delivers a genuinely useful, ultimate free AI learning guide.

Tone: Self-aware, slightly humorous, but still authoritative. Heavy on a the emoji use.
Structure:
1. Hook — wink at the sameness of these posts.
2. Meta transition — admit you asked AI to cut through the noise.
3. Numbered list — 7–9 resources, each with:
• Course name + source
• What you’ll learn
• How to access it for free
4. Mix big names + under-the-radar gems.
5. Closing — light joke + “What did I miss?” CTA.

Addendum: Expand to as many free AI/ML courses as LinkedIn’s 3,000-character limit will allow, grouped into Foundations / Intermediate / Advanced / Ethics.



💡 Translation: I’m not just tossing you another recycled list. I’m giving you the playbook for making one that feels fresh, funny, and actually useful. That’s the real power of AI—forcing everyone here to raise their game.

So take it, run it, grab a few free courses—and know you didn’t need someone else’s output to do it for you.

💪 Build authority by sharing what you learn.
🧠 Use AI for the grunt work so you can focus on insight.
💸 Save time, look smart, maybe even go viral while you’re at it.



🚀 And because I know people want the output itself… here’s a starter pack:
1. CS50’s Intro to AI with Python (Harvard) – Hands-on projects covering search, optimization, and ML basics. Free via edX (audit mode). 👉 cs50.harvard.edu/ai
2. Elements of AI (Univ. of Helsinki) – Friendly intro to AI concepts, no code required. 👉 elementsofai.com
3. Google ML Crash Course – Quick, interactive ML basics with TensorFlow. 👉 https://lnkd.in/eNTdD9Fm
4. fast.ai Practical Deep Learning – Build deep learning models fast. 👉 course.fast.ai
5. DeepMind x UCL Reinforcement Learning – The classic lectures by David Silver. 👉 davidsilver.uk/teaching


Happy weekend everyone!

💬 Reddit Communities:

What if AI Could Argue With Itself Before Advising Me?

“What if asking ChatGPT/Claude/Gemini wasn’t about getting the right answer — but watching the argument that gets you there?”

This is the question that caused me to launched GetIdea.ai — a side project that became a system, a system that became a mirror, and a mirror that occasionally throws insults at my ideas (thanks Harsh Critic 🔥).

Over the past few months, I’ve been building a multi-agent AI interface where ideas are tested not by a single voice, but by a council of distinct personalities. It’s not production-scale, but it’s already the most honest and useful AI interaction I’ve ever had. It started with a simple, frustrating problem:


🤔 The Problem: One Voice Is Almost Never Enough

First, if you’re at all like me you may feel most AI chats are really monologues disguised as a dialogue.

Even with all the right prompting, I still had to:

  • Play the Devil’s Advocate
  • Be the Strategic Thinker
  • Remember the market context
  • Question my own biases

And worst of all — I had to trust that the AI would play fair when it was really just playing along.

What I wanted wasn’t “help.” What I wanted was debate. Structured, selective, emotionally differentiated debate.


💡 The Concept: Assemble the Squad

So I built GetIdea.ai, a real-time multi-agent system where AI personas argue with each other so I don’t have to.

You ask a question — like:

“Should I quit my job to start an indie game studio?”

And instead of one fuzzy maybe-response, you get a brutal realist, a business strategist, and sometimes a Hype Champion trying to gas you up just enough to ignore them both.

What started as a test of CrewAI and WebSocket orchestration became a real product with:

  • Confidence-based agent routing
  • Conversation memory
  • Typing indicators
  • Real-time squad assembly
  • Modular personalities like:

This isn’t just multiple answers — it’s structured dissent, with context, consistency, and enough personality to feel like a team, not a trivia night.

🧠 How It Actually Works (And Why It Matters)

Let’s say you ask:

“Should I quit my job to start an indie game studio?”

Here’s what happens under the hood:

🧠 GetIdea.ai instantly assembles a confidence-filtered squad of AI advisors. In this case:

  • 🔥 Harsh Critic: high confidence in risk analysis, startup failure patterns, and tough love
  • 💰 Business Strategist: high confidence in financial models, scalability, and unit economics
  • 💡 Creative Catalyst: low confidence in risk — but very high in vision, innovation, and potential

Now here’s the kicker:

Each agent knows its strengths. It doesn’t pretend to be an expert in everything — it plays its role.


🎭 The Augment in Action (Yes, this really happened)

So, how does it work? Let’s use your question: “Should I quit my job to start an indie game studio?”

Instead of one answer, the system instantly assembles an advisory squad based on confidence. For this query, it routes to three distinct personas: a visionary, a pragmatist, and a realist.

Then, you get to watch the argument unfold in real-time.

🔥 Harsh Critic:

“The market is brutally competitive and often financially disastrous. Without groundbreaking innovation and a financial safety net, it’s a fool’s errand. Keep your job while testing your concept on the side.”

💰 Business Strategist:

“Consider your revenue model and target audience. Ensure diversified income streams and validate your concept with market research before making a decision.”

💡 Creative Catalyst (not triggered this time):

(Filtered out) — their confidence score wasn’t high enough to weigh in unless you lowered the threshold.

🔥 Harsh Critic:

“Sure, the Strategist makes good points — but you’re not in the business yet. Talking revenue models before you’ve validated demand is like planning a restaurant menu before knowing if anyone’s hungry.


🧪 Why That Matters

This isn’t a debate for entertainment. It’s a mirror for your own bias.

If you:

  • Want optimism → lower the threshold, and 💡 Creative Catalyst joins.
  • Want realism → leave it high, and only the tough love sticks.
  • Want synthesis → add 🔄 Synthesis Master, who bridges their insights into a decision framework.

That’s the hidden power of GetIdea.ai: It’s not answering your question — It’s helping you ask better ones.


🧪 The Experiment Behind the Scenes

There’s a hidden slider in the UI: Confidence Threshold. Slide it down, and you get wild ideas. Slide it up, and only the most certain agents speak.

That single control taught me more about my own bias than I expected. If I don’t want to hear Harsh Critic, it’s not because he’s wrong — it’s because I’m not ready for him. But when I am ready? His hit rate is scary.

Also — each conversation starts with “assembling your expert advisory team.” Because that’s how this should feel: like you’re being heard, not processed.


✨ Why This Matters (to Me and Maybe to You)

This isn’t a startup pitch. Not yet.

But it’s a signal. That we’re moving from:

  • Query → Answer to
  • Question → Assembly → Synthesis

That’s not just more useful — it’s more human.

And honestly? It made me want to ask better questions.


👀 Coming Next in the Series

In Part 2: “The Build”, I’ll share:

  • The architecture I’m modernizing
  • Why crew_chat.py is 2,100 lines of chaos (and still worked)
  • What went wrong (and hilariously right)
  • How this system gave me real-time feedback on my own decision patterns

And eventually in Part 3: “The Payoff”, I’ll show where this is going — and why multi-agent systems might become the UI layer for better thought, not just better output.


✅ TL;DR (because I built this for people like me):

GetIdea.ai is:

  • A real, working multi-agent chat system
  • Built in CrewAI, FastAPI, and WebSocket magic
  • Designed to simulate collaborative, conflicting, yet emotionally readable decision-making
  • Still messy under the hood, but intentionally honest in tone

And maybe… it’s the future of how we talk to machines. By teaching them to talk to each other first.


🔗 Your Turn: Test It, Shape It, or Join In

The project is live, and this is where you come in. I’d be grateful for your help in any of these three ways:

  1. 🧪 Share Your Results: Try the tool with a real problem you’re facing. Post the most surprising or insightful piece of advice you get in the comments below.
  2. 💡 Suggest a Persona: What expert is missing from the council? A ‘Legal Advisor’? A ‘Marketing Guru’? Comment with the persona you think I should build next.
  3. 🤝 Become a Beta Tester: For those who want to go a step further, I’m looking for a handful of people for a 15-minute feedback session to help improve the experience. If you’re interested, just comment “I’m in!”

You can try the system right here: GetIdea.ai

I’m excited to hear what you think!

Why the “Worse” PM Job Might Be the Safer One Right Now

I used to think my biggest strength as a product leader was being a breaker of silos. I’m a business and systems architect at heart — the kind who refuses to just “ship fast” and instead builds systems and processes that make good products easier to ship.

The irony? Those same systems may have made it easier to replace the decision-making with AI.

That’s why a recent post about two Senior PMs stuck with me:

  • Senior PM A — Clear roadmap, supportive team, space to decide, loves the job.
  • Senior PM B — Constant firefighting, no clear goals, drowning in meetings, exhausted.

Same title. Same salary. Completely different realities.


The obvious answer

Most people see this and think: “Clearly, Senior PM A has the better gig. Who wouldn’t want clarity, respect, and breathing room?”

I agree — if you’re talking about today’s workplace.


The AI-era twist

In a well-oiled, optimized system, Senior PM A’s decisions follow predictable patterns: Quarterly planning? Review the metrics, weigh the trade-offs, pick a path. Feature prioritization? Run it through the scoring model. Resource allocation? Follow the established framework.

Those are exactly the kinds of structured, rules-based decisions AI can handle well — not because they’re trivial, but because they have clear inputs and repeatable logic.

Senior PM B’s world is different. One week it’s killing a feature mid-sprint because a major client threatened to churn over an unrelated issue. The next, it’s navigating a regulatory curveball that suddenly affects three product lines. Then the CEO declares a new strategic pivot — immediately.

This isn’t just chaos. It’s high-stakes problem-solving with incomplete data, shifting constraints, and human dynamics in the mix. Right now, that’s still work AI struggles to do.


Why chaos can be strategic

If you’re Senior PM B, you’re not just firefighting. You’re building skills that are harder to automate:

  • Reading between the lines — knowing when “customers are asking for this” means three key deals are at risk vs. one loud voice in the room.
  • Navigating crosscurrents — redirecting an “urgent” marketing request toward something that actually moves the business.
  • Making judgment calls with partial data — acting decisively while staying ready to adapt.

These skills aren’t “soft.” They’re advanced problem-solving abilities: reading between the lines, navigating political currents, and making judgment calls with partial data. AI can process information, but right now, it struggles to match human problem-solving in high-context, high-stakes situations.


How to use the advantage

If you’re in the chaos seat, you have leverage — but only if you’re intentional:

  1. Document your decisions — keep a log that shows how you reason through ambiguity, not just what you decided.
  2. Translate chaos into patterns — identify which recurring problems point to deeper systemic fixes.
  3. Build your network — the people you can call in a pinch are as valuable as any process.

The long game

Eventually, AI will get better at handling some of this unpredictability too. But the people best positioned to design that AI? They’re the ones who’ve lived the chaos and know which decisions can be structured — and which can’t.


The takeaway

In the AI era, the “worse” jobs might be the ones teaching you the most resilient skills — especially the hardest to teach: problem solving. So, if you’re Senior PM B right now, you may be tired — but you’re also learning how to make high-context, high-stakes calls in ways AI can’t yet match.

The key is to treat it as training for the future, not just survival in the present.

How Habits are the BEST Indicator of YOUR Personality

🚗 Your driving habits reveal more about your work personality than your resume.

I just built a personality assessment that asks the REAL questions:
❌ “Are you patient at work?”
✅ “Do you tailgate when driving?”
❌ “Do you focus well?”
✅ “Do you check every notification immediately?”
❌ “Are you organized?”
✅ “Do you pack excessively for short trips?”

Turns out, the person who leaves 2-second gaps between cars is probably great at giving teammates space to finish their thoughts. 🤔

The one who double-checks everything before leaving the house? Probably your go-to for quality control.

And if you interrupt people mid-sentence… well, we need to talk about those meeting habits. 😅

Plot twist: I got “Thoughtful Analyst” but scored 0% on self-maintenance. Apparently skipping lunch to perfect a project is… on brand? 🤷‍♂️

The best part? This isn’t about labeling people – it’s about understanding the tiny behaviors that create big workplace dynamics.

Try it and tell me what you got! Link in comments 👇
(And yes, I definitely tailgate sometimes. Working on it.)

GitHub Link: https://github.com/walterreid/workplace-personality-micro-behaviors

💬 Reddit Communities:

Microsofts Visionary Reframing

✅ Visionary Compliance Score: 96/100. Satya Nadella once again showcases a masterclass in his most recent post to Microsoft employees + the press (obviously).

Here’s what my Custom GPT (Visionary Reframing – Custom GPT) thought he could still add to make it sparkle – and what he also left out:

https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2025/07/24/recommitting-to-our-why-what-and-how/

Assessment:

This message is masterful in tone—emotionally resonant, forward-looking, and richly layered with strategic ambiguity. It blends vulnerability with conviction, and personal accountability with collective aspiration. The narrative traverses past, present, and future seamlessly, invoking historical context while casting a bold, systemic vision forward. It’s evocative of Satya Nadella’s hallmark style: introspective, macro-aware, and mission-anchored.



Suggested Adjustments:
•   Slightly reduce repetition in middle sections (especially around AI transformation and platform layering) to maintain rhythmic clarity without dilution.
•   A bit more poetic abstraction could elevate the already-strong “mission” section—perhaps by metaphor or contrast to non-digital paradigms.
•   A gentle softening of corporate jargon like “SFI, QEI, and Engineering Thrive” might enhance emotional accessibility without losing technical fidelity.



True Meaning (Refined):

We’ve had to make painful staffing decisions recently, even while the company is doing well on paper. It’s a paradox of our industry: success doesn’t guarantee stability. Still, we’re entering a massive transformation led by AI. To thrive, we must reinvent how we work, build, and think. Our mission remains about empowerment—but in this new era, it means helping people and organizations build their own tools through AI. We’ve made real progress, and the future will demand more of us. If we meet the moment, we can leave a meaningful legacy.

But, What’s Left Unsaid:
•   The specific business rationale for the layoffs, or which divisions were impacted.
•   The emotional toll on remaining teams (beyond abstract empathy).
•   Whether internal dissent or concern is being surfaced and engaged.
•   What trade-offs are being made between AI investment and human resource management.

💬 Reddit Communities:

Spec-Driven Development: AI Architectural Patterns for Success…

…Or how I learned to stop vibe-coding and love the modular bomb

Honestly, it’s been a while.

Like many of you, I’ve been deep in the weeds — testing AI limits, hitting context walls, and rediscovering that the very thing that makes AI development powerful (context) is also what makes it fragile.

A recent — and increasingly common — Reddit thread snapped it into focus. The developer cycle looks like this:

Vibe-code → context fades → docs bloat → token limits hit → modular fixes → more docs → repeat.

It’s not just annoying. It’s systemic. If you’re building with AI tools like Claude, Cursor, or Copilot, this “context rot” is the quiet killer of momentum, accuracy, and scalability.

The Real Problem: Context Rot and Architectural Drift

“Vibe-coding”—the joyful chaos of just diving in—works at small scale. But as projects grow, LLMs choke on sprawling histories. They forget relationships, misapply logic, and start reinventing what you already built.

Three things make this worse:

  • LLM Degradation at Scale: Chroma’s “Context Rot” study and benchmarks like LongICLBench confirm what we’ve all felt: as context length increases, performance falls. Even models like Gemini 1.5 Pro (with a 1M-token window) start stumbling over long-form reasoning.
  • Human Churn: Our own docs spiral out of date. We iterate fast and forget to anchor intent. .prod.main.final.final-v2 is funny the first time it happens… just not the 27th time at 2 am with a deadline.
  • Architectural Blindness: LLMs are excellent implementers but poor architects. Without modular framing or persistent context, they flail. As one dev put it: “Claude’s like a junior with infinite typing speed and no memory. You still need to be the brain.”

How I Navigated the Cycle: From Chaos to Clauses

I’m a business and product architect, but I often end up wearing every hat — producer, game designer, systems thinker, and yes, sometimes even the game dev. I love working on game projects because they force clarity. They’re brutally honest. Any design flaw? You’ll feel it fast.

One night, deep into a procedural, atmospheric roguelite I was building to sharpen my thinking, I hit the same wall every AI-assisted developer eventually crashes into: context disappeared, re-prompts started failing, and the output drifted hard. My AI companion turned into a bit of a wildcard — spawning new files, reinventing functions, even retrying ideas we’d already ruled out for good reason.

Early on, I followed the path many developers are now embracing:

  1. Start vibe-coding
  2. Lose context
  3. Create a single architectural document (e.g., claude.md)
  4. That bloats
  5. Break it into modular prompt files (e.g., claude.md, /command modules/)
  6. That eventually bloats too

The cycle doesn’t end. It just upgrades. But each step forward buys clarity—and that’s what makes this process worth it.

claude.md: Not My Invention, But a Damn Good Habit

I didn’t invent claude.md. It’s a community practice—a persistent markdown file that functions like a screenplay for your workspace. You can use any document format that helps your AI stay anchored. The name is just shorthand for a living architectural spec.

# claude.md
> Persistent context for Claude/Cursor. Keep open during sessions.

## Project Overview
- **Name**: Dreamscape
- **Engine**: Unity 2022+
- **Core Loop**: Dreamlike exploration with modular storytelling

## Key Scripts
- `GameManager.cs`: Handles global state
- `EffectRegistry.cs`: Connects power-ups and logic
- `SceneLoader.cs`: Transitions with async logic 

TIP: Reference this in prompts: // See claude.md

But even this anchor file bloats over time—which is where modular prompt definitions come in.

claude.md + Module files: Teaching Commands Like Functions

My architecture evolved. I needed a way to scope instructions—to teach the AI how to handle repeated requests, like creating new weapon effects or enemy logic. So I made a modular pattern using claude.md + command prompts:

# claude.md
## /create_effect
> Creates a new status effect for the roguelike.
- Inherits from `BaseEffect`
- Registers in `EffectRegistry.cs`
- Sample: `/create_effect BurnEffect that does damage over time` 

This triggers the AI to pull a scoped module file:

# create_effect.module.md
## Create New Effect
1. Generate `PoisonEffect.cs` inheriting from `BaseEffect`
2. Override `ApplyEffect()`
   - Reduce enemy HP over time
   - Slow movement for 3s
3. Register in `EffectRegistry.cs`
4. Add icon: `poison_icon.png` in `Resources/`
5. Update `PlayerBullet.cs` to attach effect 

The AI now acts with purpose, not guesswork. But here’s the truth: Even modularity has entropy. After 20 modules, you’ll need sub-modules. After that, indexing. The bloat shifts—not vanishes.

Modularity Is Just the Next Plateau

The Reddit conversations reflect it clearly—this is an iterative struggle:

  • Vibe-coding is fast, until it fragments.
  • Documentation helps, until it balloons.
  • Modularity is clean, until it multiplies.

So don’t look for a silver bullet. Look for altitude.

Every level of architectural thinking gets you further before collapse. You’re not defeating context entropy—you’re just outpacing it.

Actionable Takeaways for Technical Leaders

  • Design Before Code: Start every feature with a plain-English .md file. Force clarity before implementation.
  • Modularize Prompt Context: Keep a /prompts/ directory of modular markdown files. Load only what’s needed per task.
  • Feature-by-Feature Git Discipline: Develop in small branches. Commit early, often. Update specs with every change.
  • Own the Architecture: LLMs build well—but only from your blueprints. Don’t delegate the structure.

Bonus: Based on my tests for token usage this method reduces prompt size by 2–10x and cuts debugging time by up to 25% because it introduces more surgical precision.

This Will Happen to You — and That’s the Point

If you’re building anything complex—a game system, a CRM, a finance tool—this will happen to you. This isn’t hyperbole. It will.

Not because your AI model is weak. But because the problem isn’t model size—it’s architectural load. Even with 2 million tokens of context, you can’t brute force clarity. You have to design for it.

That’s why I believe the era of AI-assisted development isn’t about being better developers. It’s about becoming better architects.

What’s Your Approach?

How are you managing AI context in real projects? Have a prompt ritual, toolchain trick, or mental model that works? Drop it in the comments. I’m collecting patterns.


Sources:

Chroma Research – Context Rot: How Increasing Input Tokens Impacts LLM Performance

  • URL: https://research.trychroma.com/context-rot
  • Description: A research paper defining and demonstrating “Context Rot,” where LLM performance degrades significantly with increasing input context length across various models.

LongICLBench: Long-context LLMs Struggle with Long In-context Learning – arXiv

What is a long context window? Google DeepMind engineers explain – Google Blog

Context windows – Anthropic API Documentation