llm-toolkit
Basic llm tools for rust
Motivation & Philosophy
High-level LLM frameworks like LangChain, while powerful, can be problematic in Rust. Their heavy abstractions and complex type systems often conflict with Rust's strengths, imposing significant constraints and learning curves on developers.
There is a clear need for a different kind of tool: a low-level, unopinionated, and minimalist toolkit that provides robust "last mile" utilities for LLM integration, much like how candle provides core building blocks for ML without dictating the entire application architecture.
This document proposes the creation of llm-toolkit, a new library crate designed to be the professional's choice for building reliable, high-performance LLM-powered applications in Rust.
Core Design Principles
-
Minimalist & Unopinionated: The toolkit will NOT impose any specific application architecture. Developers are free to design their own
UseCases andServices.llm-toolkitsimply provides a set of sharp, reliable "tools" to be called when needed. -
Focused on the "Last Mile Problem": The toolkit focuses on solving the most common and frustrating problems that occur at the boundary between a strongly-typed Rust application and the unstructured, often unpredictable string-based responses from LLM APIs.
-
Minimal Dependencies: The toolkit will have minimal dependencies (primarily
serdeandminijinja) to ensure it can be added to any Rust project with negligible overhead and maximum compatibility.
Features
| Feature Area | Description | Key Components | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Content Extraction | Safely extracting structured data (like JSON) from unstructured LLM responses. | extract module (FlexibleExtractor, extract_json) |
Implemented |
| Prompt Generation | Building complex prompts from Rust data structures with a powerful templating engine. | prompt! macro, #[derive(ToPrompt)], #[derive(ToPromptSet)] |
Implemented |
| Multi-Target Prompts | Generate multiple prompt formats from a single data structure for different contexts. | ToPromptSet trait, #[prompt_for(...)] attributes |
Implemented |
| Context-Aware Prompts | Generate prompts for a type within the context of another (e.g., a Tool for an Agent). |
ToPromptFor<T> trait, #[derive(ToPromptFor)] |
Implemented |
| Example Aggregation | Combine examples from multiple data structures into a single formatted section. | examples_section! macro |
Implemented |
| External Prompt Templates | Load prompt templates from external files to separate prompts from Rust code. | #[prompt(template_file = "...")] attribute |
Implemented |
| Type-Safe Intent Definition | Generate prompt builders and extractors from a single enum definition. | #[define_intent] macro |
Implemented |
| Intent Extraction | Extracting structured intents (e.g., enums) from LLM responses. | intent module (IntentFrame, IntentExtractor) |
Implemented |
| Agent API | Define reusable AI agents with expertise and structured outputs. | Agent trait, #[derive(Agent)] macro |
Implemented |
| Auto-JSON Enforcement | Automatically add JSON schema instructions to agent prompts for better LLM compliance. | #[derive(Agent)] with ToPrompt::prompt_schema() integration |
Implemented |
| Built-in Retry | Automatic retry on transient errors (ParseError, ProcessError, IoError) with configurable attempts. | max_retries attribute, AgentError::is_retryable() |
Implemented |
| Multi-Modal Payload | Pass text and images to agents through a unified Payload interface with backward compatibility. |
Payload, PayloadContent types |
Implemented |
| Multi-Agent Orchestration | Coordinate multiple agents to execute complex workflows with adaptive error recovery. | Orchestrator, BlueprintWorkflow, StrategyMap |
Implemented |
| Resilient Deserialization | Deserializing LLM responses into Rust types, handling schema variations. | (Planned) | Planned |
Prompt Generation
llm-toolkit offers three powerful and convenient ways to generate prompts, powered by the minijinja templating engine.
1. Ad-hoc Prompts with prompt! macro
For quick prototyping and flexible prompt creation, the prompt! macro provides a println!-like experience. You can pass any serde::Serialize-able data as context.
use prompt;
use Serialize;
let user = User ;
let task = "designing a new macro";
let p = prompt!.unwrap;
assert_eq!;
2. Structured Prompts with #[derive(ToPrompt)]
For core application logic, you can derive the ToPrompt trait on your structs to generate prompts in a type-safe way.
Setup:
First, enable the derive feature in your Cargo.toml:
[]
= { = "0.1.0", = ["derive"] }
= { = "1.0", = ["derive"] }
Usage:
Then, use the #[derive(ToPrompt)] and #[prompt(...)] attributes on your struct. The struct must also derive serde::Serialize.
use ToPrompt;
use Serialize;
let user = UserProfile ;
let p = user.to_prompt;
// The following would be printed:
// USER PROFILE:
// Name: Yui
// Role: World-Class Pro Engineer
Default Formatting and Field Attributes
If you omit the #[prompt(template = "...")] attribute on a struct, ToPrompt will automatically generate a key-value representation of the struct's fields. You can control this output with field-level attributes:
| Attribute | Description |
|---|---|
#[prompt(rename = "new_name")] |
Overrides the key with "new_name". |
#[prompt(skip)] |
Excludes the field from the output. |
#[prompt(format_with = "path::to::func")] |
Uses a custom function to format the field's value. |
The key for each field is determined with the following priority:
#[prompt(rename = "...")]attribute.- Doc comment (
/// ...) on the field. - The field's name (fallback).
Comprehensive Example:
use ToPrompt;
use ToPrompt; // Make sure to import the derive macro
use Serialize;
// A custom formatting function
let user = AdvancedUser ;
let p = user.to_prompt;
// The following would be generated:
// The user's unique identifier: 123
// full_name: Mai
// formatted_id: user-123
Tip: Handling Special Characters in Templates
When using raw string literals (r#"..."#) for your templates, be aware of a potential parsing issue if your template content includes the # character (e.g., in a hex color code like "#FFFFFF").
The macro parser can sometimes get confused by the inner #. To avoid this, you can use a different number of # symbols for the raw string delimiter.
Problematic Example:
// This might fail to parse correctly
Solution:
// Use r##"..."## to avoid ambiguity
Using External Template Files
For larger prompts, you can separate them into external files (.jinja, .txt, etc.) and reference them using the template_file attribute. This improves code readability and makes prompts easier to manage.
You can also enable compile-time validation of your templates with validate = true.
use ToPrompt;
use Serialize;
// In templates/user_profile.jinja:
// Name: {{ name }}
// Email: {{ email }}
let user = UserFromTemplate ;
let p = user.to_prompt;
// The following would be generated from the file:
// Name: Yui
// Email: yui@example.com
3. Enum Documentation with #[derive(ToPrompt)]
For enums, the ToPrompt derive macro provides flexible ways to generate prompts. It distinguishes between instance-level prompts (describing a single variant) and type-level schema (describing all possible variants).
Instance vs. Type-Level Prompts
use ToPrompt;
/// Represents different user intents for a chatbot
// Instance-level: describe the current variant only
let intent = Greeting;
let prompt = intent.to_prompt;
// Output: "Greeting: User wants to greet or say hello"
// Type-level: describe all possible variants
let schema = prompt_schema;
// Output:
// UserIntent: Represents different user intents for a chatbot
//
// Possible values:
// - Greeting: User wants to greet or say hello
// - Help: User is asking for help or assistance
When to use which:
value.to_prompt()- When you need to describe a specific enum value to the LLM (e.g., "The user selected: Greeting")Enum::prompt_schema()- When you need to explain all possible options to the LLM (e.g., "Choose one of these intents...")
Advanced Attribute Controls
The ToPrompt derive macro supports powerful attribute-based controls for fine-tuning the generated prompts:
#[prompt("...")]- Provide a custom description that overrides the doc comment#[prompt(skip)]- Exclude a variant from the schema (but the variant name is still shown at instance level)- No attribute - Variants without doc comments or attributes will show just the variant name
Here's a comprehensive example showcasing all features:
use ToPrompt;
/// Represents different actions a user can take in the system
// Instance-level prompts
let action1 = CreateDocument;
assert_eq!;
let action2 = InternalDebugAction;
assert_eq!; // Skipped variants show name only
// Type-level schema
let schema = prompt_schema;
// Output:
// UserAction: Represents different actions a user can take in the system
//
// Possible values:
// - CreateDocument: User wants to create a new document
// - Search: User is searching for existing content
// - UpdateProfile: Custom: User is updating their profile settings and preferences
// - DeleteItem
//
// Note: InternalDebugAction is excluded from schema due to #[prompt(skip)]
Behavior of #[prompt(skip)]:
- At instance level (
value.to_prompt()): Shows only the variant name - At type level (
Enum::prompt_schema()): Completely excluded from the schema
4. Multi-Target Prompts with #[derive(ToPromptSet)]
For applications that need to generate different prompt formats from the same data structure for various contexts (e.g., human-readable vs. machine-parsable, or different LLM models), the ToPromptSet derive macro enables powerful multi-target prompt generation.
Basic Multi-Target Setup
use ToPromptSet;
use Serialize;
let task = Task ;
// Generate visual-friendly prompt using template
let visual_prompt = task.to_prompt_for?;
// Output: "## Implement feature\n\n> Add new functionality"
// Generate agent-friendly prompt with key-value format
let agent_prompt = task.to_prompt_for?;
// Output: "title: Implement feature\ndescription: Add new functionality\npriority: 1\ninternal_id: 42"
Advanced Features
Custom Formatting Functions:
Multimodal Support:
use ;
// Generate multimodal prompt with both text and image
let parts = task.to_prompt_parts_for?;
// Returns Vec<PromptPart> with both Image and Text parts
Target Configuration Options
| Attribute | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|
#[prompt_for(name = "TargetName")] |
Include field in specific target | #[prompt_for(name = "Debug")] |
#[prompt_for(name = "Target", template = "...")] |
Use template for target (struct-level) | #[prompt_for(name = "Visual", template = "{{title}}")] |
#[prompt_for(name = "Target", rename = "new_name")] |
Rename field for specific target | #[prompt_for(name = "API", rename = "task_id")] |
#[prompt_for(name = "Target", format_with = "func")] |
Custom formatting function | #[prompt_for(name = "Human", format_with = "format_date")] |
#[prompt_for(name = "Target", image)] |
Mark field as image content | #[prompt_for(name = "Vision", image)] |
#[prompt_for(skip)] |
Exclude field from all targets | #[prompt_for(skip)] |
When to use ToPromptSet vs ToPrompt:
ToPrompt: Single, consistent prompt format across your applicationToPromptSet: Multiple prompt formats needed for different contexts (human vs. machine, different LLM models, etc.)
5. Context-Aware Prompts with #[derive(ToPromptFor)]
Sometimes, the way you want to represent a type in a prompt depends on the context. For example, a Tool might have a different prompt representation when being presented to an Agent versus a human user. The ToPromptFor<T> trait and its derive macro solve this problem.
It allows a struct to generate a prompt for a specific target type, using the target's data in its template.
Usage:
The struct using ToPromptFor must derive Serialize and ToPrompt. The target struct passed to it must also derive Serialize.
use ;
use Serialize;
// Enables schema_only, example_only modes for ToPrompt
/// A tool that can be used by an agent.
let agent = Agent ;
let tool = Tool ;
let prompt = tool.to_prompt_for;
// Generates a detailed prompt using the agent's name and role,
// and the tool's own schema and example.
6. Aggregating Examples with examples_section!
When providing few-shot examples to an LLM, it's often useful to show examples of all the data structures it might need to generate. The examples_section! macro automates this by creating a clean, formatted Markdown block from a list of types.
Usage:
All types passed to the macro must derive ToPrompt and Default, and have #[prompt(mode = "full")] and #[prompt(example = "...")] attributes to provide meaningful examples.
use ;
use Serialize;
/// Represents a user of the system.
/// Defines a concept for image generation.
let examples = examples_section!;
// The macro generates the following Markdown string:
//
// ### Examples
//
// Here are examples of the data structures you should use.
//
// ---
// #### `User`
// {
// "id": "user-12345",
// "name": "Taro Yamada"
// }
// ---
// #### `Concept`
// {
// "prompt": "a futuristic city at night",
// "style": "anime"
// }
// ---
Intent Extraction with IntentFrame
llm-toolkit provides a safe and robust way to extract structured intents (like enums) from an LLM's response. The core component for this is the IntentFrame struct.
It solves a common problem: ensuring the tag you use to frame a query in a prompt (<query>...</query>) and the tag you use to extract the response (<intent>...</intent>) are managed together, preventing typos and mismatches.
Usage:
IntentFrame is used for two things: wrapping your input and extracting the structured response.
use ;
use FromStr;
// 1. Define your intent enum
// 2. Create an IntentFrame
// The first tag is for wrapping input, the second is for extracting the response.
let frame = new;
// 3. Wrap your input to create part of your prompt
let user_input = "what is the weather in Tokyo?";
let wrapped_input = frame.wrap;
// wrapped_input is now "<user_query>what is the weather in Tokyo?</user_query>"
// (Imagine sending a full prompt with wrapped_input to an LLM here)
// 4. Extract the intent from the LLM's response
let llm_response = "Okay, I will get the weather. <intent>GetWeather</intent>";
let intent: UserIntent = frame.extract_intent.unwrap;
assert_eq!;
Type-Safe Intents with define_intent!
To achieve the highest level of type safety and developer experience, the #[define_intent] macro automates the entire process of creating and extracting intents.
It solves a critical problem: by defining the prompt, the intent enum, and the extraction logic in a single place, it becomes impossible for the prompt-building code and the response-parsing code to diverge.
Usage:
Simply annotate an enum with #[define_intent] and provide the prompt template and extractor tag in an #[intent(...)] attribute.
use ;
use FromStr;
/// The user's primary intent.
// The macro automatically generates:
// 1. A function: `build_user_intent_prompt(user_request: &str) -> String`
// 2. A struct: `pub struct UserIntentExtractor;` which implements `IntentExtractor<UserIntent>`
// --- How to use the generated code ---
// 1. Build the prompt
let prompt = build_user_intent_prompt;
// The prompt will include the formatted documentation from the enum.
// 2. Use the generated extractor to parse the LLM's response
let llm_response = "Understood. The user wants to know the weather. <intent>GetWeather</intent>";
let extractor = UserIntentExtractor;
let intent = extractor.extract_intent.unwrap;
assert_eq!;
This macro provides:
- Ultimate Type Safety: The prompt and the parser are guaranteed to be in sync.
- Improved DX: Eliminates boilerplate code for prompt functions and extractors.
- Single Source of Truth: The
enumbecomes the single, reliable source for all intent-related logic.
Multi-Tag Mode for Complex Action Extraction
For more complex scenarios where you need to extract multiple action tags from a single LLM response, the define_intent! macro supports a multi_tag mode. This is particularly useful for agent-like applications where the LLM might use multiple XML-style action tags in a single response.
Setup:
To use multi-tag mode, add both dependencies to your Cargo.toml:
[]
= { = "0.8.3", = ["derive"] }
= "0.38" # Required for multi_tag mode
Then define your actions:
use define_intent;
Action Tag Attributes:
#[action(tag = "TagName")]- Defines the XML tag name for this action#[action(attribute)]- Maps a field to an XML attribute (e.g.,<Tag field="value" />)#[action(inner_text)]- Maps a field to the inner text content (e.g.,<Tag>field_value</Tag>)
Generated Functions: The macro generates:
build_chat_action_prompt(user_request: &str) -> String- Builds the prompt with action documentationChatActionExtractorstruct with methods:extract_actions(&self, text: &str) -> Result<Vec<ChatAction>, IntentError>- Extract all actions from responsetransform_actions<F>(&self, text: &str, transformer: F) -> String- Transform action tags using a closurestrip_actions(&self, text: &str) -> String- Remove all action tags from text
Usage Example:
// 1. Build the prompt
let prompt = build_chat_action_prompt;
// 2. Extract multiple actions from LLM response
let llm_response = r#"
Here's the weather: <GetWeather />
And here's a cat picture: <ShowImage href="https://cataas.com/cat" />
<SendMessage to="user">I've completed both requests!</SendMessage>
"#;
let extractor = ChatActionExtractor;
let actions = extractor.extract_actions?;
// Returns: [ChatAction::GetWeather, ChatAction::ShowImage { href: "https://cataas.com/cat" }, ...]
// 3. Transform action tags to human-readable descriptions
let transformed = extractor.transform_actions;
// Result: "Here's the weather: [Checking weather...]\nAnd here's a cat picture: [Displaying image from https://cataas.com/cat]\n[Message to user: I've completed both requests!]"
// 4. Strip all action tags for clean text output
let clean_text = extractor.strip_actions;
// Result: "Here's the weather: \nAnd here's a cat picture: \n"
When to Use Multi-Tag Mode:
- Agent Applications: When building AI agents that perform multiple actions per response
- Rich LLM Interactions: When you need structured actions mixed with natural language
- Action Processing Pipelines: When you need to extract, transform, or clean action-based responses
Agent API and Multi-Agent Orchestration
llm-toolkit provides a powerful agent framework for building multi-agent LLM systems with a clear separation of concerns.
Agent API: Capability and Intent Separation
The Agent API follows the principle of capability and intent separation:
- Capability: An agent declares what it can do (
expertise) and what it produces (Output) - Intent: The orchestrator provides what needs to be done as a
Payload(multi-modal content)
This separation enables maximum reusability and flexibility.
Multi-Modal Agent Communication with Payload
The execute() method accepts a Payload type that supports multi-modal content including text and images. This enables agents to process both textual instructions and visual inputs.
Basic Usage (Text Only):
use Agent;
// String automatically converts to Payload for backward compatibility
let result = agent.execute.await?;
// Or use Payload explicitly
use Payload;
let payload = text;
let result = agent.execute.await?;
Multi-Modal Usage (Text + Images):
use Payload;
use PathBuf;
// Combine text and images
let payload = text
.with_image;
let result = agent.execute.await?;
// Or from raw image data
let image_bytes = read?;
let payload = text
.with_image_data;
Backward Compatibility:
All existing code using String continues to work thanks to automatic conversion:
// This still works unchanged
let result = agent.execute.await?;
Note: While the Payload type supports images, not all agent backends currently process them. ClaudeCodeAgent and GeminiAgent will log a warning if images are included but not yet supported by the CLI integration.
Defining Agents: Two Approaches
llm-toolkit provides two ways to define agents, each optimized for different use cases:
1. Simple Agents with #[derive(Agent)] (Recommended for Prototyping)
For quick prototyping and simple use cases, use the derive macro:
use Agent;
use ;
// Simple stateless agent
;
// Usage - extremely simple
async
Features:
- ✅ Simplest possible interface
- ✅ Minimal boilerplate
- ✅ Perfect for prototyping
- ⚠️ Creates internal agent on each
execute()call (stateless)
Automatic JSON Schema Enforcement:
When using #[derive(Agent)] with a structured output type (non-String), the macro automatically adds JSON schema instructions to the agent's expertise. This dramatically improves LLM compliance and reduces parse errors.
use ;
use ;
;
// The agent's expertise() method automatically returns:
// "Review code quality and provide detailed feedback
//
// IMPORTANT: Respond with valid JSON matching this schema:
//
// ### Schema for `ReviewResult`
// {
// "quality_score": "number", // Overall quality score from 0 to 100,
// "issues": "string[]", // List of identified issues,
// "recommendations": "string[]" // Actionable recommendations for improvement
// }"
Schema Generation Strategy (3-Tier Auto-Inference):
-
With
ToPrompt+ doc comments → Detailed schema with field descriptions- Requires:
#[derive(ToPrompt)]+#[prompt(mode = "full")] - Best experience: Full field-level documentation
- Requires:
-
With
ToPrompt(no doc comments) → Basic schema with field names- Requires:
#[derive(ToPrompt)]+#[prompt(mode = "full")] - Good: Type-safe field names
- Requires:
-
String output → No JSON enforcement
- For plain text responses
Recommendation: Always use #[derive(ToPrompt)] with #[prompt(mode = "full")] for structured outputs to get the best LLM compliance.
Automatic Retry on Transient Errors:
All agents automatically retry on transient errors (ParseError, ProcessError, IoError) without any configuration:
;
// Automatically retries up to 3 times on:
// - ParseError: LLM output malformed
// - ProcessError: Process communication issues
// - IoError: Temporary I/O failures
//
// Behavior:
// - Attempt 1 fails → wait 100ms → retry
// - Attempt 2 fails → wait 200ms → retry
// - Attempt 3 fails → wait 300ms → retry
// - All attempts exhausted → return error
Customizing Retry Behavior:
// Increase retry attempts for critical operations
;
// Disable retry for fast-fail scenarios
;
Design Philosophy:
Agent-level retries are intentionally simple and limited (2-3 attempts, fixed delay):
- Fail fast: Quickly report errors to the orchestrator
- Orchestrator is smarter: Has broader context for complex error recovery
- Try different agents
- Redesign strategy
- Escalate to human
- System stability: Simple local retries + complex orchestration at the top = robust system
This design aligns with the Orchestrator's 3-stage error recovery (Tactical → Full Redesign → Human Escalation).
2. Advanced Agents with #[agent(...)] (Recommended for Production)
For production use, testing, and when you need agent injection:
use ClaudeCodeAgent;
use ;
// Advanced agent with Generic support
;
async
Practical Injection Examples:
use ;
// Example 1: Environment-based agent selection
// Example 2: Switching between different LLM providers
// Example 3: Custom configuration injection
Features:
- ✅ Agent injection support (great for testing with mocks)
- ✅ Reuses internal agent (efficient)
- ✅ Static dispatch (compile-time optimization)
- ✅ Multiple constructor patterns
- ✅ Suitable for production use
Testing Example:
Agent injection makes testing simple and deterministic:
Using Custom Agent Backends:
You can specify custom agent implementations (like Olama, local models, etc.) using default_inner:
// Define your custom agent
use Payload;
// Create specialized agents using OlamaAgent as backend
;
;
// Usage:
let olama = new.with_model;
let writer = new;
let reviewer = new;
This pattern lets you:
- ✅ Reuse one backend (Olama, etc.) for multiple specialized agents
- ✅ Each agent has unique expertise
- ✅ Share configuration or customize per-agent
- ✅ Easy testing with mock backends
When to use which:
#[derive(Agent)]: Quick scripts, prototyping, simple tools#[agent(...)]withbackend: Production with Claude/Gemini#[agent(...)]withdefault_inner: Custom backends (Olama, local models, mocks)
Multi-Agent Orchestration
For complex workflows requiring multiple agents, the Orchestrator coordinates execution with adaptive error recovery.
Core Concepts
- BlueprintWorkflow: A natural language description of your workflow (no rigid types needed)
- StrategyMap: An ad-hoc execution plan generated by LLM based on available agents
- Adaptive Redesign: Three-stage error recovery (Retry → Tactical → Full Regenerate)
Basic Orchestrator Usage
use ;
use ClaudeCodeAgent;
async
Advanced: Custom Agents with Orchestrator
You can combine custom agents (defined with #[derive(Agent)]) with the orchestrator:
;
;
// Add both to orchestrator
let mut orchestrator = new;
orchestrator.add_agent;
orchestrator.add_agent;
// The orchestrator will automatically select the best agent for each step
Orchestrator Features
- ✅ Natural Language Blueprints: Define workflows in plain English
- ✅ Ad-hoc Strategy Generation: LLM generates execution plans based on available agents
- ✅ 3-Stage Error Recovery:
- Retry: For transient errors
- Tactical Redesign: Modify failed steps and continue
- Full Regenerate: Start over with a new strategy
- ✅ Built-in Validation: Optional validation steps with
InnerValidatorAgent - ✅ Smart Context Management: Automatic passing of outputs between steps with
ToPromptsupport
Smart Context Management with ToPrompt
The orchestrator automatically manages context between agent steps. When an agent produces output, the orchestrator stores it and makes it available to subsequent steps. If the output type implements ToPrompt, the orchestrator intelligently uses the human-readable prompt representation instead of raw JSON.
Why This Matters:
When you have complex output types (like enums with variant descriptions, or structs with rich formatting), you want the orchestrator to pass them to the next agent in a readable, LLM-friendly format—not as opaque JSON.
Example: Enum with ToPrompt
use ;
use ;
// Define an enum with rich documentation
// Agent that produces this enum
;
How it works:
- Step 1:
AnalyzerAgentproducesAnalysisResult::NeedsRevision { reasons: [...] } - Orchestrator stores two versions:
step_1_output: JSON representation{"NeedsRevision": {"reasons": [...]}}step_1_output_prompt: ToPrompt representation with full descriptions
- Step 2: When building intent for the next agent, the orchestrator prefers the
_promptversion - Result: Next agent receives rich, human-readable context instead of cryptic JSON
Setup:
To enable ToPrompt support for your agent outputs, use AgentAdapter::with_to_prompt:
use AgentAdapter;
let agent = new;
let adapter = with_to_prompt;
orchestrator.add_agent;
Benefits:
- Better LLM Understanding: Complex types are presented in natural language, not JSON
- Automatic Fallback: If
ToPromptis not implemented, JSON is used (backward compatible) - Type-Safe: The conversion is compile-time verified through the type system
- Zero Overhead: Only computed once per step and cached in context
Run the example:
Future Directions
Image Handling Abstraction
A planned feature is to introduce a unified interface for handling image inputs across different LLM providers. This would abstract away the complexities of dealing with various data formats (e.g., Base64, URLs, local file paths) and model-specific requirements, providing a simple and consistent API for multimodal applications.