LLM Development

The unglamorous, essential part of LLM features: evaluation, prompt design, and picking the right model for the job.

Get a free quote Hire a developer

In short

LLM development is the work of building reliable features on top of large language models — prompt design, output evaluation, choosing between models and providers, and deciding when retrieval, fine-tuning, or a simpler approach is the right tool. DuCodes treats this as an engineering discipline with its own testing and iteration cycle, not a one-time prompt written and forgotten.

Behind every working LLM feature is a body of unglamorous work: prompts that get iterated against real inputs, an evaluation process that catches regressions when a prompt or model changes, and a deliberate choice about which model actually fits the task's accuracy, latency, and cost requirements. We treat that as core engineering, not an afterthought around an API call.

This includes selecting and comparing models (OpenAI, Anthropic, Gemini, and open-source options where self-hosting makes sense), designing prompts and output schemas, and building the evaluation harness that tells you when a change actually improved things versus just felt like it did.

Why work with DuCodes on this

Evaluation, not vibes

We test prompt and model changes against a real set of inputs with expected outputs, rather than judging quality by a handful of manual spot checks.

Model choice based on your requirements

We'll recommend the model (or combination of models) that fits your actual accuracy, latency, and cost needs — not whichever is most talked about.

Prompts treated as versioned, tested code

Prompt changes go through the same review and testing discipline as application code, since a small wording change can meaningfully shift output quality.

Knows when NOT to use an LLM

Some parts of a workflow are more reliably handled by deterministic code — we'll say so rather than routing everything through a model by default.

How we work

1

Define the task and success criteria

What does a correct output actually look like, and what error rate is acceptable?

2

Model & approach selection

Comparing models and techniques (prompting, RAG, fine-tuning) against your actual requirements.

3

Build the evaluation harness

A real test set so future changes can be measured, not just guessed at.

4

Iterate on prompts and pipeline

Structured iteration against the evaluation set, not ad hoc tweaking.

5

Deploy & monitor drift

Ongoing tracking, since model updates and changing usage patterns can shift output quality over time.

Technology we use

OpenAI / Anthropic / Gemini APIs Python LangChain Evaluation frameworks Open-source models (where self-hosting fits)

Frequently asked questions

Mostly the latter — prompting and retrieval solve most business use cases without the cost and maintenance overhead of fine-tuning. We'll recommend fine-tuning specifically when there's a clear case for it.

We test against a real evaluation set with known-good outputs, so changes get measured rather than judged by feel.

Yes — model choice depends on your accuracy, latency, cost, and specific capability needs (like multimodal input or long context), which we'll assess against your actual use case.

We'll tell you directly — a lot of "AI feature" requests are better and more reliably solved with deterministic logic, and we'd rather say that upfront than build something unnecessarily complex.

Ready to talk about your project?

Let's discuss llm development