Prompt Engineering Guide
πŸ˜ƒ Basics
πŸ’Ό Applications
πŸ§™β€β™‚οΈ Intermediate
🧠 Advanced
Special Topics
🌱 New Techniques
πŸ€– Agents
βš–οΈ Reliability
πŸ–ΌοΈ Image Prompting
πŸ”“ Prompt Hacking
πŸ”¨ Tooling
πŸ’ͺ Prompt Tuning
πŸ—‚οΈ RAG
🎲 Miscellaneous
Models
πŸ“ Language Models
Resources
πŸ“™ Vocabulary Resource
πŸ“š Bibliography
πŸ“¦ Prompted Products
πŸ›Έ Additional Resources
πŸ”₯ Hot Topics
✨ Credits
πŸ”¨ ToolingPrompt Engineering IDEsConclusion

Conclusion

Reading Time: 1 minute
Last updated on August 7, 2024

Sander Schulhoff

This page will be updated as I get access to more IDEs.

This chapter has provided an overview of some of the tools which may be of interest to you as a prompt engineer. Below are my recommendations for which to use, and in what capacity. Keep in mind that prompt engineering is a rapidly evolving field, and many of the previously mentioned tools will undergo signifigant changes in the future.

For Single Prompt Iterating

Everyprompt seems to have the best feature set for single prompt iterating (from the IDEs I have been able to try). Regular playground is also good, and a bit simpler.

For Prompt Chaining

Dust is currently the best (less technical) tool for prompt chaining. It provides a very robust feature set.

Embeds

Dyno is the only tool which offers an embed.

For Full Control

LangChainis the way to go! It is a Python library, so it is fully extensible, and already comes with a great feature set.

More

I will be adding more recommendations as I get access to more IDEs. I recommend trying out different ones, as each has a distinct feel and different features.

Sander Schulhoff

Sander Schulhoff is the Founder of Learn Prompting and an ML Researcher at the University of Maryland. He created the first open-source Prompt Engineering guide, reaching 3M+ people and teaching them to use tools like ChatGPT. Sander also led a team behind Prompt Report, the most comprehensive study of prompting ever done, co-authored with researchers from the University of Maryland, OpenAI, Microsoft, Google, Princeton, Stanford, and other leading institutions. This 76-page survey analyzed 1,500+ academic papers and covered 200+ prompting techniques.