RAG Chunking Strategy
IntermediatedataMinimum 32K context
Chooses how to split documents for retrieval so that chunks stay semantically coherent and answerable. Compares fixed-size, recursive, semantic, and structure-aware splitting, sets chunk size and overlap against the embedding model's limits, handles tables, code, and headings, and covers contextual headers plus parent-document retrieval to avoid losing surrounding meaning.
Use cases
- Picking chunk size and overlap for a given embedding model
- Splitting structured documents without breaking tables or code
- Adding contextual headers so chunks stand alone
- Diagnosing poor retrieval caused by bad chunk boundaries
Example prompt
Our RAG pipeline retrieves irrelevant passages from a corpus of technical manuals with headings, tables, and code samples. Current setup: fixed 1000-character chunks, no overlap. Recommend a chunking strategy: what splitter to use, chunk size and overlap for our embedding model, how to keep tables and code blocks intact, and whether to add contextual headers or parent-document retrieval. Explain how I would A/B test the change against retrieval metrics.
Recommended models
Compatible tools
claude-codecursorkiroany
Modalities
Input: text, code
→Output: text, code
Related Skills
Author
OpenModels Community