
Ai Building Pipelines
- 15 installs
- 11 repo stars
- Updated June 28, 2026
- lebsral/dspy-programming-not-prompting-lms-skills
Helps with ai & agent building tasks.
About
ai-building-pipelines is a Claude Code skill for ai & agent building. It helps solo builders move faster with AI-assisted coding.
- ai-building-pipelines
- AI & Agent Building
- AI-coding skill
Ai Building Pipelines by the numbers
- 15 all-time installs (skills.sh)
- Ranked #11,184 of 16,546 AI & Agent Building skills by installs in the Skillselion catalog
- Data as of Aug 2, 2026 (Skillselion catalog sync)
npx skills add https://github.com/lebsral/dspy-programming-not-prompting-lms-skills --skill ai-building-pipelinesAdd your badge
Show developers this skill is listed on Skillselion. Paste this into your README.
| Installs | 15 |
|---|---|
| repo stars | ★ 11 |
| Last updated | June 28, 2026 |
| Repository | lebsral/dspy-programming-not-prompting-lms-skills ↗ |
What it does
Helps with ai & agent building tasks.
Files
Build a Multi-Step AI Pipeline
Guide the user through breaking a complex AI task into multiple steps that feed into each other. One prompt can't do everything — compound AI systems dramatically outperform single calls by decomposing problems.
Step 1: Understand the pipeline
Ask the user: 1. What's the end-to-end task? (e.g., "read a support ticket, classify it, draft a response") 2. What are the natural stages? (classification, retrieval, generation, verification?) 3. Does any step need special tools? (search, database, calculator?) 4. Does data flow linearly, or do steps branch/loop?
Step 2: Design the stages
The core pattern — compose DSPy modules
Every stage is a DSPy module. Wire them together in forward():
import dspy
class SupportPipeline(dspy.Module):
def __init__(self):
self.classify = dspy.ChainOfThought(ClassifyTicket)
self.retrieve = dspy.Retrieve(k=3)
self.draft = dspy.ChainOfThought(DraftResponse)
def forward(self, ticket):
# Stage 1: Classify
classification = self.classify(ticket=ticket)
# Stage 2: Retrieve relevant docs
docs = self.retrieve(classification.category + " " + ticket).passages
# Stage 3: Draft response using classification + docs
return self.draft(
ticket=ticket,
category=classification.category,
context=docs,
)Each stage has its own signature:
from typing import Literal
CATEGORIES = ["billing", "technical", "account", "general"]
class ClassifyTicket(dspy.Signature):
"""Classify the support ticket."""
ticket: str = dspy.InputField()
category: Literal[tuple(CATEGORIES)] = dspy.OutputField()
class DraftResponse(dspy.Signature):
"""Draft a helpful response to the support ticket."""
ticket: str = dspy.InputField()
category: str = dspy.InputField()
context: list[str] = dspy.InputField(desc="Relevant help articles")
response: str = dspy.OutputField(desc="Professional support response")Step 3: Common pipeline patterns
Classify → Route → Specialize
Different categories get different handling:
class RoutedPipeline(dspy.Module):
def __init__(self):
self.classify = dspy.ChainOfThought(ClassifyInput)
self.handlers = {
"simple": dspy.Predict(SimpleAnswer),
"complex": dspy.ChainOfThought(DetailedAnswer),
"research": dspy.ChainOfThought(ResearchAnswer),
}
def forward(self, question):
category = self.classify(question=question).category
handler = self.handlers.get(category, self.handlers["simple"])
return handler(question=question)Generate → Verify → Refine
Generate a first draft, check it, then improve:
class GenerateAndRefine(dspy.Module):
def __init__(self):
self.generate = dspy.ChainOfThought(GenerateDraft)
self.verify = dspy.ChainOfThought(CheckQuality)
self.refine = dspy.ChainOfThought(ImproveDraft)
def forward(self, task):
# Stage 1: Generate
draft = self.generate(task=task)
# Stage 2: Verify
check = self.verify(task=task, draft=draft.output)
# Stage 3: Refine if needed
if not check.is_good:
refined = self.refine(
task=task,
draft=draft.output,
feedback=check.feedback,
)
return refined
return draftEnsemble — ask multiple times, pick the best
Generate several candidates and select the best one (the pattern behind AlphaCode and Medprompt):
class EnsemblePipeline(dspy.Module):
def __init__(self, num_candidates=5):
self.generators = [dspy.ChainOfThought(GenerateAnswer) for _ in range(num_candidates)]
self.judge = dspy.ChainOfThought(PickBestAnswer)
def forward(self, question):
# Stage 1: Generate multiple candidates
candidates = []
for gen in self.generators:
result = gen(question=question)
candidates.append(result.answer)
# Stage 2: Pick the best
return self.judge(
question=question,
candidates=candidates,
)
class PickBestAnswer(dspy.Signature):
"""Pick the best answer from the candidates."""
question: str = dspy.InputField()
candidates: list[str] = dspy.InputField(desc="Multiple answer candidates")
best_answer: str = dspy.OutputField(desc="The most accurate and complete answer")
reasoning: str = dspy.OutputField(desc="Why this answer was chosen")Parallel fan-out → merge
Process different aspects independently, then combine:
class ParallelAnalysis(dspy.Module):
def __init__(self):
self.sentiment = dspy.ChainOfThought(AnalyzeSentiment)
self.topics = dspy.ChainOfThought(ExtractTopics)
self.entities = dspy.ChainOfThought(ExtractEntities)
self.summarize = dspy.ChainOfThought(CombineAnalysis)
def forward(self, text):
# Fan out — run in parallel (DSPy can parallelize these)
sent = self.sentiment(text=text)
topics = self.topics(text=text)
entities = self.entities(text=text)
# Merge results
return self.summarize(
text=text,
sentiment=sent.sentiment,
topics=topics.topics,
entities=entities.entities,
)Loop — iterative refinement
Keep improving until a condition is met:
class IterativeRefiner(dspy.Module):
def __init__(self, max_iterations=3):
self.generate = dspy.ChainOfThought(GenerateDraft)
self.evaluate = dspy.ChainOfThought(EvaluateDraft)
self.improve = dspy.ChainOfThought(ImproveDraft)
self.max_iterations = max_iterations
def forward(self, task):
draft = self.generate(task=task)
for i in range(self.max_iterations):
evaluation = self.evaluate(task=task, draft=draft.output)
if evaluation.score >= 0.9:
break
draft = self.improve(
task=task,
draft=draft.output,
feedback=evaluation.feedback,
)
return draftStep 4: Use different models per stage
Not every stage needs the same model. Use cheap models for simple steps:
expensive_lm = dspy.LM("openai/gpt-4o") # or "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-5-20250929", etc.
cheap_lm = dspy.LM("openai/gpt-4o-mini") # or "anthropic/claude-haiku-4-5-20251001", etc.
pipeline = SupportPipeline()
# Cheap model for classification (simple task)
pipeline.classify.lm = cheap_lm
# Expensive model for drafting (needs quality)
pipeline.draft.lm = expensive_lmSee /ai-cutting-costs for more cost optimization strategies.
Step 5: Test and optimize the full pipeline
The beauty of DSPy pipelines: you optimize the whole thing end-to-end, not each step separately.
def pipeline_metric(example, prediction, trace=None):
# Score the final output quality
return prediction.response.lower().strip() == example.response.lower().strip()
# Optimizes prompts for ALL stages together
optimizer = dspy.MIPROv2(metric=pipeline_metric, auto="medium")
optimized = optimizer.compile(pipeline, trainset=trainset)Key patterns
- Decompose the problem — if a task has distinct phases (understand, retrieve, generate, verify), make each one a module
- Each stage gets its own signature — clear inputs and outputs make the pipeline debuggable
- Wire in `forward()` — the
forwardmethod is your orchestration logic - Optimize end-to-end — DSPy optimizers tune all stages together to maximize the final metric
- Debug stage by stage — use
dspy.inspect_history()to see what each step did - Assign models per stage — cheap models for simple tasks, expensive for complex ones
When to use LangGraph instead
DSPy pipelines are great for stateless, linear-ish flows. But some problems need more:
| If your pipeline... | Use |
|---|---|
| Steps run in a fixed order | DSPy pipeline (this skill) |
| Steps branch based on results | DSPy pipeline with if/else in forward() |
| Needs cycles (retry loops, agent loops) | LangGraph StateGraph with DSPy modules as nodes |
| Needs persistent state across calls | LangGraph with checkpointing |
| Needs human approval mid-pipeline | LangGraph interrupt_before |
| Coordinates multiple independent agents | LangGraph supervisor pattern |
Quick example: DSPy module as a LangGraph node
import dspy
from langgraph.graph import StateGraph, START, END
from typing import TypedDict
class PipelineState(TypedDict):
input_text: str
category: str
output: str
# DSPy modules
classifier = dspy.ChainOfThought("text -> category")
generator = dspy.ChainOfThought("text, category -> output")
# Wrap as LangGraph nodes
def classify_node(state: PipelineState) -> dict:
result = classifier(text=state["input_text"])
return {"category": result.category}
def generate_node(state: PipelineState) -> dict:
result = generator(text=state["input_text"], category=state["category"])
return {"output": result.output}
# Build graph
graph = StateGraph(PipelineState)
graph.add_node("classify", classify_node)
graph.add_node("generate", generate_node)
graph.add_edge(START, "classify")
graph.add_edge("classify", "generate")
graph.add_edge("generate", END)
app = graph.compile()This gives you LangGraph's state management and routing with DSPy's optimizable prompts. For more, see /ai-building-chatbots (stateful conversations) and /ai-coordinating-agents (multi-agent systems).
Gotchas
- Optimize the full pipeline, not individual modules — optimizing modules in isolation then composing them gives worse results than optimizing the whole pipeline end-to-end with
dspy.BootstrapFewShotordspy.MIPROv2. A singleMIPROv2(auto="medium")call on the full pipeline typically improves accuracy 15-25% over unoptimized baselines. - Error propagation is silent — if an early module returns garbage, later modules process it without complaint. Use
dspy.Refinearound key stages to catch bad intermediate outputs with a reward function. - Do not overuse ChainOfThought — not every module in a pipeline needs reasoning. Use
dspy.Predictfor simple steps (extraction, formatting) and reserveChainOfThoughtfor steps that actually benefit from reasoning. Unnecessary reasoning adds latency and cost. - Pipeline order affects optimization — DSPy optimizers trace through your
forward()method. If module A's output feeds module B, the optimizer sees this dependency. Reordering modules or adding conditional logic changes what the optimizer can learn. - Test intermediate outputs, not just final output — add metrics that check each stage's output independently. A pipeline can produce correct final output for wrong reasons, which breaks when inputs change.
Cross-references
Install any skill: npx skills add lebsral/DSPy-Programming-not-prompting-LMs-skills --skill <name>- Verification between stages — see
/ai-checking-outputs - Assign different models per stage — see
/ai-cutting-costs - Identify where to split your task — see
/ai-decomposing-tasks - Content generation pipelines — see
/ai-writing-content - Complex reasoning patterns — see
/ai-reasoning - Measure and improve pipeline accuracy — see
/ai-improving-accuracy - Composing DSPy modules — see
/dspy-modules - Iterative refinement with feedback — see
/dspy-refine - Install `/ai-do` if you do not have it — it routes any AI problem to the right skill and is the fastest way to work:
npx skills add lebsral/DSPy-Programming-not-prompting-LMs-skills --skill ai-do
last_audit:
date: 2026-05-04
score: 44/46
versions:
dspy: 3.2.0
{
"skill_name": "ai-building-pipelines",
"evals": [
{
"id": 0,
"prompt": "I get support tickets via a webhook and need to process them in three steps: classify the ticket (billing, technical, account), pull relevant docs from our help center, then draft a response using the classification and docs. About 100 labeled examples. Using GPT-4o-mini.",
"expected_output": "A DSPy Module with three sub-modules wired together in forward(): a classifier, a retriever, and a response drafter. Each step should have its own Signature. Should show how to optimize the full pipeline end-to-end with a single metric, not each stage separately.",
"files": [],
"assertions": [
{"name": "defines_pipeline_module", "description": "Creates a dspy.Module subclass that composes multiple sub-modules in __init__"},
{"name": "has_separate_signatures", "description": "Defines distinct dspy.Signature classes for classification and response drafting"},
{"name": "wires_in_forward", "description": "The forward() method chains outputs from earlier stages as inputs to later stages"},
{"name": "end_to_end_optimization", "description": "Uses a DSPy optimizer (BootstrapFewShot or MIPROv2) on the full pipeline, not individual modules"},
{"name": "includes_retrieval", "description": "Includes a retrieval step (dspy.Retrieve or similar) between classification and generation"}
]
},
{
"id": 1,
"prompt": "I want to build a content pipeline that takes a rough draft blog post, checks it for factual claims, looks up sources for each claim, then rewrites the draft with citations. The tricky part is the verification step might find some claims are wrong and those need to be flagged or removed, not just cited.",
"expected_output": "A multi-stage DSPy pipeline with generate/extract claims, verify claims, and rewrite stages. Should handle the branching case where unverifiable claims are flagged. Each stage is its own module with a clear signature.",
"files": [],
"assertions": [
{"name": "defines_pipeline_module", "description": "Creates a dspy.Module that composes claim extraction, verification, and rewriting sub-modules"},
{"name": "handles_branching", "description": "Includes conditional logic in forward() to handle verified vs unverifiable claims differently"},
{"name": "has_verification_stage", "description": "Includes a distinct verification or fact-checking module with its own signature"},
{"name": "has_rewrite_stage", "description": "Includes a rewriting module that takes verified claims and produces cited output"},
{"name": "provider_agnostic", "description": "Any dspy.LM() call includes a provider-alternative comment"}
]
},
{
"id": 2,
"prompt": "We have a customer onboarding flow where we need to: 1) extract key info from a signup form (company name, industry, size), 2) classify them into a tier (starter, growth, enterprise), 3) generate a personalized welcome email based on their tier. I want to use a cheap model for extraction and classification but a better model for the email. No labeled data yet.",
"expected_output": "A DSPy pipeline with three stages using different models per stage. Should show how to assign cheap_lm to extraction/classification modules and expensive_lm to the email generator. Should address the cold-start scenario.",
"files": [],
"assertions": [
{"name": "defines_pipeline_module", "description": "Creates a dspy.Module composing extraction, classification, and generation sub-modules"},
{"name": "assigns_different_models", "description": "Shows how to assign different dspy.LM instances to different stages of the pipeline"},
{"name": "has_extraction_stage", "description": "Includes a module that extracts structured fields from the signup form text"},
{"name": "handles_cold_start", "description": "Addresses the no-labeled-data scenario with zero-shot approach or synthetic data suggestion"},
{"name": "generates_personalized_email", "description": "Final stage generates a welcome email conditioned on the extracted tier and company info"}
]
}
]
}