LLMs for Product Teams: A Practical Guide
Everything product teams need to know about building with Large Language Models. From prompt engineering to fine-tuning decisions, cost optimization, and production deployment patterns.
The LLM Landscape for Product Builders
The LLM space moves fast, but the fundamentals for product teams are stable. You need to understand three things: what LLMs can do well, where they fail, and how to build reliable products on top of them.
What LLMs excel at: Content generation, classification, extraction, summarization, translation, code generation, and conversational interfaces. If the task involves natural language, an LLM can probably help.
Where they struggle: Precise calculations, real-time data, consistent formatting (without guardrails), factual accuracy on niche topics, and tasks requiring visual understanding (though multimodal models are closing this gap).
The product builder's framework: Start with the user problem, not the technology. Ask "What would this experience look like if it were magical?" then work backward to figure out which LLM capabilities get you closest.
The biggest mistake product teams make: building "AI features" instead of building features that happen to use AI. Users don't care about your model—they care about their outcomes.
Prompt Engineering: The 80/20 of LLM Products
Before you think about fine-tuning, RAG, or agents, master prompt engineering. It's the highest-leverage skill for product teams building with LLMs.
System prompts set the behavior. Think of them as the "operating system" for your LLM feature. A well-crafted system prompt can eliminate 80% of edge cases.
Few-shot examples are your secret weapon. Instead of describing what you want, show it. Include 3-5 examples of ideal input/output pairs in your prompt.
Structured output prevents downstream failures. Use JSON schemas, XML tags, or explicit formatting instructions to ensure consistent output your code can parse.
Chain-of-thought prompting improves reasoning quality. For complex tasks, asking the model to "think step by step" dramatically reduces errors.
The iteration loop: Write prompt → test with 50+ real examples → identify failure modes → add guardrails → repeat. Most teams iterate 10-20 times before shipping.
Fine-Tuning vs. Prompting: Making the Right Call
The fine-tuning vs. prompting decision is the most important technical choice you'll make. Get it wrong and you waste months and thousands of dollars.
Start with prompting. Always. Fine-tuning is a premature optimization 90% of the time. Modern models (GPT-4, Claude, Gemini) are powerful enough that well-engineered prompts handle most use cases.
Consider fine-tuning when: - You need consistent style/tone that prompting can't achieve - Latency requirements demand a smaller, specialized model - You have domain-specific knowledge the base model lacks - Cost per inference needs to be significantly lower - You need behavior that's hard to describe but easy to demonstrate
The data requirement: Fine-tuning requires 500-5,000 high-quality examples minimum. If you don't have this data, you're not ready for fine-tuning.
The hybrid approach: Many teams fine-tune a smaller model for high-volume, well-defined tasks while using a larger model with careful prompting for complex, varied tasks.
Deep dive
Enjoying this article?
Get deep technical guides like this delivered weekly.
Cost Optimization Without Sacrificing Quality
LLM costs can spiral quickly. A single feature processing 10K requests/day at $0.03 per request costs $9K/month. Here's how to bring that down to $500.
Model routing: Not every request needs GPT-4. Build a classifier that routes simple requests to cheaper models (GPT-4o-mini, Haiku) and only escalates to premium models for complex cases. This alone can cut costs by 60-80%.
Caching: Many LLM requests are similar or identical. Implement semantic caching that returns cached results for queries within a similarity threshold. Typical cache hit rates: 30-50%.
Prompt optimization: Shorter prompts cost less. Eliminate redundancy, compress examples, and use the minimum context needed. A 40% prompt reduction = 40% cost reduction.
Batch processing: For non-real-time tasks, batch requests to use cheaper batch APIs (often 50% off real-time pricing).
Output limiting: Set maximum token limits appropriate for each use case. A classification task doesn't need 4,000 tokens of output.
Production Deployment Patterns
Getting an LLM to work in a notebook is easy. Making it reliable in production is where most teams struggle.
Guardrails: Always validate LLM outputs before showing them to users. Check for PII, harmful content, format compliance, and factual claims against your data.
Fallbacks: Have a graceful degradation path when the LLM fails, times out, or returns garbage. This might be a cached response, a simpler model, or a human handoff.
Observability: Log every request and response. Track latency, cost, error rates, and user satisfaction. Without this, you're flying blind.
A/B testing: Test prompt changes like you test code changes. Use feature flags to gradually roll out new prompts and measure impact on user outcomes.
Rate limiting: Protect your budget and your upstream API quotas. Implement per-user and per-feature rate limits with clear error messages.
These patterns aren't optional—they're the difference between a demo and a product.
Get AI growth insights weekly
Join engineers and product leaders building with AI. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.