cs.SESep 23, 2026

Constraint-Driven Context Engineering: Designing Domain Interfaces for AI Systems

Authors: Xiwei Xu, Chen Wang, Mengmeng Yang, Yipeng Zhang, Jacky Jiang, Suyu Ma, Youyang Qu, Ming Ding, 

Organizations: CSIRO, Sydney, Australia

Abstract

Generative AI systems are increasingly deployed to address domain problems. These systems operate under technical, regulatory, institutional, and normative constraints that define acceptable AI behaviour and outcomes within their domains. We observe a recurring pattern in our industry engagement: partners often arrive with a functioning but relatively generic AI solution. The challenge is no longer to build an AI system from scratch, but to improve the quality and domain appropriateness of an AI-generated solution. In these settings, the limiting factor is often the quality, scope, and structure of the context available to the system. Yet, existing context engineering approaches primarily focus on supplying domain knowledge through retrieval, memory, and tools, with limited support for systematically identifying and operationalising the constraints that govern AI systems in their operational environments. This paper proposes Constraint-Driven Context Engineering (CDCE), a design approach for engineering domain interfaces for AI systems. Drawing on software architecture design and Domain-Driven Design (DDD), CDCE treats domain constraints as first-class design drivers. It identifies and characterises constraints, determines the required context assets, and designs representations through which these assets are made available to AI systems. We conducted a comparative multiple-case study with industry and public-sector partners across educational assessment, healthcare decision support, and financial-distress prediction. Depending on their characteristics, constraints can guide AI behaviour, enforce permissible boundaries, or support verification of AI-generated outcomes. The cases demonstrate CDCE's applicability across contrasting domains and show how constraint characteristics shape the resulting domain interfaces.

Figures & tables

Explore similar work

Apr 5, 2026

Context Engineering: A Practitioner Methodology for Structured Human-AI Collaboration

The quality of AI-generated output is often attributed to prompting technique, but extensive empirical observation suggests that context completeness may be more strongly associated with output quality. This paper introduces Context Engineering, a structured methodology for assembling, declaring, and sequencing the complete informational payload that accompanies a prompt to an AI tool. Context Engineering defines a five-role context package structure (Authority, Exemplar, Constraint, Rubric, Metadata), applies a staged four-phase pipeline (Reviewer to Design to Builder to Auditor), and applies formal models from reliability engineering and information theory as post hoc interpretive lenses on context quality. In an observational study of 200 documented interactions across four AI tools (Claude, ChatGPT, Cowork, Codex), incomplete context was associated with 72% of iteration cycles. Structured context assembly was associated with a reduction from 3.8 to 2.0 average iteration cycles per task and an improvement in first-pass acceptance from 32% to 55%. Among structured interactions, 110 of 200 were accepted on first pass compared with 16 of 50 baseline interactions; when iteration was permitted, the final success rate reached 91.5% (183 of 200). These results are observational and reflect a single-operator dataset without controlled comparison. Preliminary corroboration is provided by a companion production automation system with eleven operating lanes and 2,132 classified tickets.
Mar 10, 2026

Context Engineering: From Prompts to Corporate Multi-Agent Architecture

As artificial intelligence (AI) systems evolve from stateless chatbots to autonomous multi-step agents, prompt engineering (PE), the discipline of crafting individual queries, proves necessary but insufficient. This paper introduces context engineering (CE) as a standalone discipline concerned with designing, structuring, and managing the entire informational environment in which an AI agent makes decisions. Drawing on vendor architectures (Google ADK, Anthropic, LangChain), current academic work (ACE framework, Google DeepMind's intelligent delegation), enterprise research (Deloitte, 2026; KPMG, 2026), and the author's experience building a multi-agent system, the paper proposes five context quality criteria: relevance, sufficiency, isolation, economy, and provenance, and frames context as the agent's operating system. Two higher-order disciplines follow. Intent engineering (IE) encodes organizational goals, values, and trade-off hierarchies into agent infrastructure. Specification engineering (SE) creates a machine-readable corpus of corporate policies and standards enabling autonomous operation of multi-agent systems at scale. Together these four disciplines form a cumulative pyramid maturity model of agent engineering, in which each level subsumes the previous one as a necessary foundation. Enterprise data reveals a gap: while 75% of enterprises plan agentic AI deployment within two years (Deloitte, 2026), deployment has surged and retreated as organizations confront scaling complexity (KPMG, 2026). The Klarna case illustrates a dual deficit, contextual and intentional. Whoever controls the agent's context controls its behavior; whoever controls its intent controls its strategy; whoever controls its specifications controls its scale.
Sep 9, 2026

Context operations to architecture modelling output from large language models and evaluation criteria for their use in systems engineering design

The development of generative artificial intelligence resources enables opportunities of speeding up systems and engineering design work. This contribution introduces a framework of formal operations for assembling context in LLM-based engineering design. This framework involves the assembly of modular context units, including policy prompts, reference units with persistence, and user questions with prompt vectoring. This approach enables the systematic structuring of interactions with generative models. A formal method for evaluating modelling-as-code LLM outputs is also presented, which enables the evaluation of compliance to intent from LLM answers and thereby asses the support from LLMs for systems architecture modelling.