Header image

Context Stacks: Why Real AI Engineers Don't Care About Prompts

You've seen the threads. "The ULTIMATE prompt for [task]." "10 magic prompts that will 10x your productivity." People hoarding prompt libraries like spell books, convinced the right incantation will unlock AI's true power.

Here's what I've noticed shipping actual AI products: based on the papers, API patterns, and architectural choices I see from the big labs, they're solving a completely different problem.

They're not sweating over whether to say "You are a world-class expert" or "You are a helpful assistant." They're not split-testing whether "step by step" beats "think carefully."

They're designing context stacks. And once you understand what that means, you'll never think about prompts the same way again.

The Distinction Most People Miss: Prompt vs Context

When most people say "prompt," they mean the message they type into ChatGPT. One big block of text. Maybe they've learned to include instructions, examples, constraints—all jammed into that one message.

But that's not what the model actually sees.

Under the hood, an LLM receives a sequence of messages:

System message(s)
Developer/app configuration
Retrieved documents
Tool definitions and tool call traces
Conversation history
The latest user message

All of that is the context.

The "prompt" is just the last human-shaped slice of it.

Prompt engineering = obsessing over the wording of that last slice.

Context engineering = designing everything that surrounds it.

One of these actually scales. The other is just busywork.

What the Model Actually Sees

Here's what a naive prompt looks like:

[
  {"role": "user", "content": "You are an expert customer support analyst. Our company sells B2B SaaS to CFOs. We care about risk and compliance. Always use bullet points. Never use jargon. Here are today's support tickets: [paste 50 tickets]. Now summarize them by theme."}
]

One message. Everything crammed in. The user has to remember to include all that context every single time.

Here's what a context stack looks like:

[
  {"role": "system", "content": "You are a customer support analyst. Always respond with bullet points. Never use jargon. Focus on actionable insights."},
  {"role": "system", "content": "Company context: B2B SaaS targeting CFOs. Key concerns: risk, compliance, ROI."},
  {"role": "system", "content": "User profile: Senior ops manager. Prefers concise summaries. Reviews tickets weekly."},
  {"role": "system", "content": "Today's tickets:\n[automatically retrieved tickets for 2025-12-09]"},
  {"role": "user", "content": "Summarize by theme."}
]

Same result. But the user prompt is four words.

Everything else was assembled automatically by the system. The user doesn't paste context—the architecture provides it.

The Six Layers of a Context Stack

The six layers of a context stack

Think of context as a stack, built from the bottom up:

Layer 1: Global Rules (System Persona)

What's always true about this AI, regardless of user or task.

Voice, tone, safety constraints
Output format expectations
Hard rules that never change

Example: "You are a coding tutor. Never write complete solutions—only hints and examples. Always explain your reasoning."

Layer 2: App/Session Configuration

What this particular application or workspace is about.

The domain or project scope
Session-specific constraints

Example: "This workspace helps users build and refactor Django applications. All code suggestions should follow PEP 8."

Layer 3: User Memory

What we know about this specific user, persisted across sessions.

Preferences, skill level, past interactions
Business context, role, goals

Example: "User is intermediate Python. Prefers explicit code over magic frameworks. Works in fintech. Previous project: payment reconciliation system."

Layer 4: Retrieved Knowledge (RAG)

The 3-10 chunks of documentation relevant to this specific query.

Product specs, API docs, style guides
Current codebase, schema, tickets
Only what's relevant—not everything

Example: "Context: [models.py for the booking module], [API contract v2.3], [current sprint requirements]"

Layer 5: Few-Shot Examples & Scratchpad

Concrete examples of input → output for this task type.

1-3 high-quality examples
Schema specifications
Intermediate reasoning or plans

Example: "Example input: 'Add user authentication'\nExample output: [clean, commented migration code]"

Layer 6: The User Message

The actual thing they typed. Ideally short and task-focused.

Example: "Add multi-vendor support to the booking flow."

Why This Changes Everything

Before and after: manual prompts vs automated context

Look at the difference:

The Prompt Hoarder:

Maintains a library of giant prompts for different tasks
Pastes context manually every time
Tweaks wording constantly, hoping for better results
Gets inconsistent outputs because context varies with each paste
Can't share their "system" with a team—it's all in their head

The Context Stack Builder:

System prompt encodes role, rules, and format once
User profile loads automatically from a database
Relevant docs are retrieved and injected per query
User prompt is short: "Write the migration for the new rule"
Team of 10 gets consistent results from the same stack

The builder isn't better because they know fancier words. They're better because they've pre-wired all the context so the model is already in the right universe before the user says anything.

Context stacks also scale:

Change the system layer once instead of updating 500 prompts
A/B test retrieval strategies, not word choices
Debug by inspecting what context was actually included
Onboard new team members without teaching them "the magic prompt"

How to Actually Do Context Engineering

Here's the practical playbook:

1. Define the "always true" stuff → System layer

Role, constraints, output formats. Keep it under 1-2 screens.

You are a [role].
Your job is [goal].
You must always [rules].
You must never [constraints].
Output format: [specification].

Don't put variable information here. If it changes per user or per task, it belongs in a different layer.

2. Separate "per user" from "per task"

Per user: Profile, preferences, business context. Store in a database. Inject automatically every time.

Per task: The current email, code file, ticket list. Retrieved fresh for each request.

Most people mix these together (been there). Separating them means you update user context once and it applies everywhere.

3. Add retrieval instead of copy-paste

Use basic RAG: vector search or even keyword search. For each query:

Identify what type of context is needed
Pull top N relevant chunks
Inject them with clear labels

[Doc: API Spec v2, Section: Authentication]
[Doc: Style Guide, Section: Error Messages]
[Doc: Current Sprint, Ticket #1247]

Labeled chunks help the model understand what it's looking at. Unlabeled walls of text don't.

4. Use templates instead of monolith prompts

Create reusable templates for each task type:

rewrite_email template expects: user_profile, recipient_context, original_email
summarize_tickets template expects: user_profile, ticket_list, time_range
code_review template expects: user_profile, code_diff, project_standards

Now you're composing context, not rewriting essays every time.

5. Here's the whole thing in code

def build_context(user_id, task_type, user_message):
    system = SYSTEM_PROMPTS[task_type]
    user_profile = load_user_profile(user_id)
    docs = retrieve_relevant_docs(user_id, user_message, task_type)
    examples = FEW_SHOT_EXAMPLES.get(task_type, "")

    messages = [
        {"role": "system", "content": system},
        {"role": "system", "content": f"User profile:\n{user_profile}"},
        {"role": "system", "content": f"Context docs:\n{docs}"},
        {"role": "system", "content": f"Examples:\n{examples}"},
        {"role": "user", "content": user_message},
    ]
    return messages

That's context engineering in 15 lines. The user's message can be dead simple because the stack did the work.

How This Changes Your Day-to-Day Prompts

Once you have a stack, your prompts should be:

Short and task-focused. "Do X with Y" instead of re-explaining the universe.

Free of configuration fluff. No more "You are an expert..." That's handled upstream.

Reference known entities. "Use my brand voice" or "follow our refund policy"—the stack knows how to inject those.

Include only per-request constraints. "Keep under 100 words" or "target CFOs, not engineers"—things that genuinely vary.

Before (prompt brain):

You are an expert LinkedIn content strategist with 15 years of
experience in B2B SaaS marketing. You understand the nuances of
professional social media and how to engage senior executives.
Your writing style is conversational but authoritative. You never
use buzzwords or jargon. You always include a hook in the first
line. You structure posts for skimmability. Here's information
about my company: [500 words]. Here's my writing style: [300 words].
Here's my target audience: [200 words]. Now write a LinkedIn post
about why context engineering beats prompt engineering.

After (context brain):

System + memory already loaded. User types:

Write a LinkedIn post about why context > prompts. 200-300 words.

Same output quality. Fraction of the effort. Consistent every time.

Where This Is Going

As LLMs become agents, context stacks become the state and environment for those agents. Think of it like session management for AI. The agent needs to know who it is, what tools it has, what the user cares about, what's already been tried—all of that is context.

Prompt hacks will age out. "Add 'step by step' to your prompt" is the 2023 equivalent of "add keywords to your meta tags." It worked for a minute. It's not a business.

Context architecture is becoming a core skill, like API design or database schema design. Teams that paste magic prompts into chat boxes will get out-executed by teams that build structured context stacks into their workflows and products.

Start Here

If you're building anything serious with AI:

Move your "always true" instructions into a system prompt. Stop pasting them every time.
Store user context separately. Even a simple JSON file beats re-explaining who you are in every message.
Add basic retrieval. Even keyword search for relevant docs beats pasting everything or pasting nothing.
Make templates for repeated tasks. If you do something more than twice, templatize it.

The people treating prompts like magic words will keep chasing viral prompt threads on Twitter.

The people who design context stacks will build systems that actually work.

Context → Decision → Outcome → Metric

Context: Building AI-powered tools where users complained about inconsistent outputs. Noticed heavy users were spending more time crafting prompts than doing actual work. Each new team member had to learn "the right way to ask."
Decision: Shifted from prompt optimization to context architecture. Built layered system: persistent user profiles, per-task templates, automatic doc retrieval. User-facing prompts became minimal.
Outcome: Consistent outputs across team. New user onboarding dropped from hours to minutes. Prompt maintenance eliminated—change system layer once, applies everywhere.
Metric: Cut prompt-related support tickets by 80%. Team prompts went from 400 words avg to 30 words avg. Output consistency jumped from 3.2/5 to 4.4/5.