rag-retrieval▌
yonatangross/orchestkit · updated Apr 8, 2026
MDX-style export adds YAML metadata + attribution linking explainx.ai and this canonical listing URL.
Comprehensive patterns for building production RAG systems. Each category has individual rule files in rules/ loaded on-demand.
RAG Retrieval
Comprehensive patterns for building production RAG systems. Each category has individual rule files in rules/ loaded on-demand.
Quick Reference
| Category | Rules | Impact | When to Use |
|---|---|---|---|
| Core RAG | 4 | CRITICAL | Basic RAG, citations, hybrid search, context management |
| Embeddings | 3 | HIGH | Model selection, chunking, batch/cache optimization |
| Contextual Retrieval | 3 | HIGH | Context-prepending, hybrid BM25+vector, pipeline |
| HyDE | 3 | HIGH | Vocabulary mismatch, hypothetical document generation |
| Agentic RAG | 4 | HIGH | Self-RAG, CRAG, knowledge graphs, adaptive routing |
| Multimodal RAG | 3 | MEDIUM | Image+text retrieval, PDF chunking, cross-modal search |
| Query Decomposition | 3 | MEDIUM | Multi-concept queries, parallel retrieval, RRF fusion |
| Reranking | 3 | MEDIUM | Cross-encoder, LLM scoring, combined signals |
| PGVector | 4 | HIGH | PostgreSQL hybrid search, HNSW indexes, schema design |
Total: 30 rules across 9 categories
Core RAG
Fundamental patterns for retrieval, generation, and pipeline composition.
| Rule | File | Key Pattern |
|---|---|---|
| Basic RAG | rules/core-basic-rag.md |
Retrieve + context + generate with citations |
| Hybrid Search | rules/core-hybrid-search.md |
RRF fusion (k=60) for semantic + keyword |
| Context Management | rules/core-context-management.md |
Token budgeting + sufficiency check |
| Pipeline Composition | rules/core-pipeline-composition.md |
Composable Decompose → HyDE → Retrieve → Rerank |
Embeddings
Embedding models, chunking strategies, and production optimization.
| Rule | File | Key Pattern |
|---|---|---|
| Models & API | rules/embeddings-models.md |
Model selection, batch API, similarity |
| Chunking | rules/embeddings-chunking.md |
Semantic boundary splitting, 512 token sweet spot |
| Advanced | rules/embeddings-advanced.md |
Redis cache, Matryoshka dims, batch processing |
Contextual Retrieval
Anthropic's context-prepending technique — 67% fewer retrieval failures.
| Rule | File | Key Pattern |
|---|---|---|
| Context Prepending | rules/contextual-prepend.md |
LLM-generated context + prompt caching |
| Hybrid Search | rules/contextual-hybrid.md |
40% BM25 / 60% vector weight split |
| Complete Pipeline | rules/contextual-pipeline.md |
End-to-end indexing + hybrid retrieval |
HyDE
Hypothetical Document Embeddings for bridging vocabulary gaps.
| Rule | File | Key Pattern |
|---|---|---|
| Generation | rules/hyde-generation.md |
Embed hypothetical doc, not query |
| Per-Concept | rules/hyde-per-concept.md |
Parallel HyDE for multi-topic queries |
| Fallback | rules/hyde-fallback.md |
2-3s timeout → direct embedding fallback |
Agentic RAG
Self-correcting retrieval with LLM-driven decision making.
| Rule | File | Key Pattern |
|---|---|---|
| Self-RAG | rules/agentic-self-rag.md |
Binary document grading for relevance |
| Corrective RAG | rules/agentic-corrective-rag.md |
CRAG workflow with web fallback |
| Knowledge Graph | rules/agentic-knowledge-graph.md |
KG + vector hybrid for entity-rich domains |
| Adaptive Retrieval | rules/agentic-adaptive-retrieval.md |
Query routing to optimal strategy |
Multimodal RAG
Image + text retrieval with cross-modal search.
| Rule | File | Key Pattern |
|---|---|---|
| Embeddings | rules/multimodal-embeddings.md |
CLIP, SigLIP 2, Voyage multimodal-3 |
| Chunking | rules/multimodal-chunking.md |
PDF extraction preserving images |
| Pipeline | rules/multimodal-pipeline.md |
Dedup + hybrid retrieval + generation |
Query Decomposition
Breaking complex queries into concepts for parallel retrieval.
| Rule | File | Key Pattern |
|---|---|---|
| Detection | rules/query-detection.md |
Heuristic indicators (<1ms fast path) |
| Decompose + RRF | rules/query-decompose.md |
LLM concept extraction + parallel retrieval |
| HyDE Combo | rules/query-hyde-combo.md |
Decompose + HyDE for maximum coverage |
Reranking
Post-retrieval re-scoring for higher precision.
| Rule | File | Key Pattern |
|---|---|---|
| Cross-Encoder | rules/reranking-cross-encoder.md |
ms-marco-MiniLM (~50ms, free) |
| LLM Reranking | rules/reranking-llm.md |
Batch scoring + Cohere API |
| Combined | rules/reranking-combined.md |
Multi-signal weighted scoring |
PGVector
Production hybrid search with PostgreSQL.
| Rule | File | Key Pattern |
|---|---|---|
| Schema | rules/pgvector-schema.md |
HNSW index + pre-computed tsvector |
| Hybrid Search | rules/pgvector-hybrid-search.md |
SQLAlchemy RRF with FULL OUTER JOIN |
| Indexing | rules/pgvector-indexing.md |
HNSW (17x faster) vs IVFFlat |
| Metadata | rules/pgvector-metadata.md |
Filtering, boosting, Redis 8 comparison |
Quick Start Example
from openai import OpenAI
client = OpenAI()
async def rag_query(question: str, top_k: int = 5) -> dict:
"""Basic RAG with citations."""
docs = await vector_db.search(question, limit=top_k)
context = "\n\n".join([f"[{i+1}] {doc.text}" for i, doc in enumerate(docs)])
response = await llm.chat([
{"role": "system", "content": "Answer with inline citations [1], [2]. Use ONLY provided context."},
{"role": "user", "content": f"Context:\n{context}\n\nQuestion: {question}"}
])
return {"answer": response.content, "sources": [d.metadata['source'] for d in docs]}
Key Decisions
| Decision | Recommendation |
|---|---|
| Embedding model | text-embedding-3-small (general), voyage-3 (production) |
| Chunk size | 256-1024 tokens (512 typical) |
| Hybrid weight | 40% BM25 / 60% vector |
| Top-k | 3-10 documents |
| Temperature | 0.1-0.3 (factual) |
| Context budget | 4K-8K tokens |
| Reranking | Retrieve 50, rerank to 10 |
| Vector index | HNSW (production), IVFFlat (high-volume) |
| HyDE timeout | 2-3 seconds with fallback |
| Query decomposition | Heuristic first, LLM only if multi-concept |
Common Mistakes
- No citation tracking (unverifiable answers)
- Context too large (dilutes relevance)
- Single retrieval method (misses keyword matches)
- Not chunking long documents (context gets lost)
- Embedding queries differently than documents
- No fallback path in agentic RAG (workflow hangs)
- Infinite rewrite loops (no retry limit)
- Using wrong similarity metric (cosine vs euclidean)
- Not caching embeddings (recomputing unchanged content)
- Missing image captions in multimodal RAG (limits text search)
Evaluations
See test-cases.json for 30 test cases across all categories.
Related Skills
ork:langgraph- LangGraph workflow patterns (for agentic RAG workflows)caching- Cache RAG responses for repeated queriesork:golden-dataset- Evaluate retrieval qualityork:llm-integration- Local embeddings with nomic-embed-textvision-language-models- Image analysis for multimodal RAGork:database-patterns- Schema design for vector search
Capability Details
retrieval-patterns
Keywords: retrieval, context, chunks, relevance, rag Solves:
- Retrieve relevant context for LLM
- Implement RAG pipeline with citations
- Optimize retrieval quality
hybrid-search
Keywords: hybrid, bm25, vector, fusion, rrf Solves:
- Combine keyword and semantic search
- Implement reciprocal rank fusion
- Balance precision and recall
embeddings
Keywords: embedding, text to vector, vectorize, chunk, similarity Solves:
- Convert text to vector embeddings
- Choose embedding models and dimensions
- Implement chunking strategies
contextual-retrieval
Keywords: contextual, anthropic, context-prepend, bm25 Solves:
- Prepend context to chunks for better retrieval
- Reduce retrieval failures by 67%
- Implement hybrid BM25+vector search
hyde
Keywords: hyde, hypothetical, vocabulary mismatch Solves:
- Bridge vocabulary gaps in semantic search
- Generate hypothetical documents for embedding
- Handle abstract or conceptual queries
agentic-rag
Keywords: self-rag, crag, corrective, adaptive, grading Solves:
- Build self-correcting RAG workflows
- Grade document relevance
- Implement web search fallback
multimodal-rag
Keywords: multimodal, image, clip, vision, pdf Solves:
- Build RAG with images and text
- Cross-modal search (text → image)
- Process PDFs with mixed content
query-decomposition
Keywords: decompose, multi-concept, complex query Solves:
- Break complex queries into concepts
- Parallel retrieval per concept
- Improve coverage for compound questions
reranking
Keywords: rerank, cross-encoder, precision, scoring Solves:
- Improve search precision post-retrieval
- Score relevance with cross-encoder or LLM
- Combine multiple scoring signals
pgvector-search
Keywords: pgvector, postgresql, hnsw, tsvector, hybrid Solves:
- Production hybrid search with PostgreSQL
- HNSW vs IVFFlat index selection
- SQL-based RRF fusion
How to use rag-retrieval on Cursor
AI-first code editor with Composer
Prerequisites
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
- ›Cursor installed and configured on your development machine
- ›Node.js version 16.0+ with npm package manager (verify with
node --version) - ›Active project directory or workspace where you want to add rag-retrieval
Execute installation command
Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
The skills CLI fetches rag-retrieval from GitHub repository yonatangross/orchestkit and configures it for Cursor.
Select Cursor when prompted
The CLI will show a list of available agents. Use arrow keys to navigate and space to select Cursor:
Verify installation
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Reload or restart Cursor to activate rag-retrieval. Access the skill through slash commands (e.g., /rag-retrieval) or your agent's skill management interface.
Security & Verification Notice
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your development environment. Always verify the publisher's identity, review recent commits, and test in isolated environments before production deployment.
List & Monetize Your Skill
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Use Cases▌
User Story & Requirements Generation
Create detailed user stories, acceptance criteria, and feature specs
Example
Generate user stories for 'password reset feature' with acceptance criteria, edge cases, and test scenarios
Reduce spec writing time by 50%, ensure comprehensive coverage
Competitive Analysis
Research competitors, compare features, identify gaps
Example
Analyze 5 competitor products, create feature comparison matrix, suggest differentiation opportunities
Complete competitive research in 2 hours instead of 2 days
Roadmap Prioritization
Evaluate features using frameworks (RICE, ICE, Kano) and create prioritized backlogs
Example
Score 20 feature ideas using RICE framework, generate prioritized roadmap with rationale
Make data-driven prioritization decisions faster
Stakeholder Communication
Draft PRDs, status updates, and stakeholder presentations
Example
Create executive summary of Q3 roadmap, monthly progress report, feature launch announcement
Save 3-5 hours/week on communication overhead
Implementation Guide▌
Prerequisites
- ›Claude Desktop or compatible AI client
- ›Access to product documentation and roadmap tools (Jira, Notion, etc.)
- ›Understanding of product management frameworks (RICE, Jobs-to-be-Done, etc.)
- ›Stakeholder contact information and communication channels
Time Estimate
30-60 minutes to see productivity improvements
Installation Steps
- 1.Install product management skill
- 2.Start with user story generation for known feature
- 3.Progress to competitive analysis: research 2-3 competitors
- 4.Use for roadmap prioritization: apply RICE/ICE scoring
- 5.Draft stakeholder communications and refine based on feedback
- 6.Build template library for recurring PM tasks
- 7.Share effective prompts with product team
Common Pitfalls
- ⚠Not validating competitive research—verify facts before sharing
- ⚠Accepting user stories without involving engineering team
- ⚠Over-relying on frameworks without qualitative judgment
- ⚠Not customizing outputs to company culture and communication style
- ⚠Skipping stakeholder validation of generated requirements
Best Practices▌
✓ Do
- +Validate research and competitive analysis with real data
- +Collaborate with engineering when generating technical requirements
- +Customize frameworks and templates to your company context
- +Use skill for first drafts, refine with stakeholder input
- +Document successful prompt patterns for PM tasks
- +Combine AI efficiency with human judgment and intuition
✗ Don't
- −Don't publish competitive analysis without fact-checking
- −Don't finalize user stories without engineering review
- −Don't make prioritization decisions solely on AI scoring
- −Don't skip customer validation of generated requirements
- −Don't ignore company-specific context and culture
💡 Pro Tips
- ★Provide context: company goals, constraints, customer feedback
- ★Ask for alternatives: 'Show 3 ways to prioritize this roadmap'
- ★Request stakeholder-specific formatting: 'Executive summary vs. engineering spec'
- ★Use skill for 70% generation + 30% customization to company needs
When to Use This▌
✓ Use When
Use for user story writing, competitive research, roadmap prioritization, stakeholder communication, and PRD drafting. Best for reducing repetitive documentation and research work.
✗ Avoid When
Avoid for strategic product vision (requires deep customer empathy), pricing decisions (needs market and financial expertise), or when face-to-face customer discovery is more valuable than speed.
Learning Path▌
- 1Basic: user stories, feature specs, status updates
- 2Intermediate: competitive analysis, prioritization frameworks, PRDs
- 3Advanced: product strategy, go-to-market planning, OKR setting
- 4Expert: product vision, market positioning, business model innovation
Discussion
Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)- No comments yet — start the thread.
Ratings
4.6★★★★★37 reviews- ★★★★★Soo White· Dec 24, 2024
rag-retrieval fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- ★★★★★Ira Farah· Dec 20, 2024
Keeps context tight: rag-retrieval is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
- ★★★★★Harper Patel· Dec 16, 2024
I recommend rag-retrieval for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
- ★★★★★Chaitanya Patil· Dec 8, 2024
We added rag-retrieval from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- ★★★★★Piyush G· Nov 27, 2024
rag-retrieval reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- ★★★★★Aanya Verma· Nov 11, 2024
rag-retrieval is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
- ★★★★★Kaira Farah· Nov 7, 2024
Useful defaults in rag-retrieval — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
- ★★★★★Kaira Liu· Oct 26, 2024
Registry listing for rag-retrieval matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- ★★★★★Shikha Mishra· Oct 18, 2024
rag-retrieval is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
- ★★★★★Ira Perez· Oct 2, 2024
rag-retrieval reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
showing 1-10 of 37