regex-vs-llm-structured-text
Lets your agent choose the best way to read texts like forms or notes. It uses simple rules or AI to extract information.
What it does
This system helps decide the best way to extract information from texts that follow a pattern, like quizzes or receipts. It uses a combined approach: first, it tries to extract most of the information with a fast and cheap method (regex), and only then uses a more advanced artificial intelligence (LLM) to fix the few cases the fast method couldn't handle.
When to use it
- ✓When you have many documents with the same format to extract data from.
- ✓When deciding whether to use a simple method (regex) or a more complex one (LLM) for reading texts.
- ✓To save money and time when extracting information from documents.
Example of what to ask your AI
“How can I extract questions and answers from a test file that has a repetitive format?”
Want more? Open the sections below.
How to use
The easiest way: copy the message below and paste it into Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor or any AI. It reads the skill and follows the instructions.
Skill link
Ready-to-paste message
How it works
First, it uses a search pattern (regex) to find and extract most of the information. Then, it checks if the extraction was reliable. If not, it uses artificial intelligence (LLM) to correct only the problematic cases.
Installation
Easiest way: copy the skill link and paste it into Claude, ChatGPT or Cursor asking it to follow the instructions.
In the terminal (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor), in your project folder:
npx skills add affaan-m/ECC --skill regex-vs-llm-structured-textOr download just the file:
curl -L https://raw.githubusercontent.com/affaan-m/ECC/main/pi/core/skills/regex-vs-llm-structured-text/SKILL.md -o SKILL.mdTechnical content (original SKILL.md)
Original text by the author, straight from GitHub.
Regex vs LLM for Structured Text Parsing
A practical decision framework for parsing structured text (quizzes, forms, invoices, documents). The key insight: regex handles 95-98% of cases cheaply and deterministically. Reserve expensive LLM calls for the remaining edge cases.
When to Activate
- Parsing structured text with repeating patterns (questions, forms, tables)
- Deciding between regex and LLM for text extraction
- Building hybrid pipelines that combine both approaches
- Optimizing cost/accuracy tradeoffs in text processing
Decision Framework
Is the text format consistent and repeating?
├── Yes (>90% follows a pattern) → Start with Regex
│ ├── Regex handles 95%+ → Done, no LLM needed
│ └── Regex handles <95% → Add LLM for edge cases only
└── No (free-form, highly variable) → Use LLM directly
Architecture Pattern
Source Text
│
▼
[Regex Parser] ─── Extracts structure (95-98% accuracy)
│
▼
[Text Cleaner] ─── Removes noise (markers, page numbers, artifacts)
│
▼
[Confidence Scorer] ─── Flags low-confidence extractions
│
├── High confidence (≥0.95) → Direct output
│
└── Low confidence (<0.95) → [LLM Validator] → Output
Implementation
1. Regex Parser (Handles the Majority)
import re
from dataclasses import dataclass
@dataclass(frozen=True)
class ParsedItem:
id: str
text: str
choices: tuple[str, ...]
answer: str
confidence: float = 1.0
def parse_structured_text(content: str) -> list[ParsedItem]:
"""Parse structured text using regex patterns."""
pattern = re.compile(
r"(?P<id>\d+)\.\s*(?P<text>.+?)\n"
r"(?P<choices>(?:[A-D]\..+?\n)+)"
r"Answer:\s*(?P<answer>[A-D])",
re.MULTILINE | re.DOTALL,
)
items = []
for match in pattern.finditer(content):
choices = tuple(
c.strip() for c in re.findall(r"[A-D]\.\s*(.+)", match.group("choices"))
)
items.append(ParsedItem(
id=match.group("id"),
text=match.group("text").strip(),
choices=choices,
answer=match.group("answer"),
))
return items
2. Confidence Scoring
Flag items that may need LLM review:
@dataclass(frozen=True)
class ConfidenceFlag:
item_id: str
score: float
reasons: tuple[str, ...]
def score_confidence(item: ParsedItem) -> ConfidenceFlag:
"""Score extraction confidence and flag issues."""
reasons = []
score = 1.0
if len(item.choices) < 3:
reasons.append("few_choices")
score -= 0.3
if not item.answer:
reasons.append("missing_answer")
score -= 0.5
if len(item.text) < 10:
reasons.append("short_text")
score -= 0.2
return ConfidenceFlag(
item_id=item.id,
score=max(0.0, score),
reasons=tuple(reasons),
)
def identify_low_confidence(
items: list[ParsedItem],
threshold: float = 0.95,
) -> list[ConfidenceFlag]:
"""Return items below confidence threshold."""
flags = [score_confidence(item) for item in items]
return [f for f in flags if f.score < threshold]
3. LLM Validator (Edge Cases Only)
def validate_with_llm(
item: ParsedItem,
original_text: str,
client,
) -> ParsedItem:
"""Use LLM to fix low-confidence extractions."""
response = client.messages.create(
model="claude-haiku-4-5-20251001", # Cheapest model for validation
max_tokens=500,
messages=[{
"role": "user",
"content": (
f"Extract the question, choices, and answer from this text.\n\n"
f"Text: {original_text}\n\n"
f"Current extraction: {item}\n\n"
f"Return corrected JSON if needed, or 'CORRECT' if accurate."
),
}],
)
# Parse LLM response and return corrected item...
return corrected_item
4. Hybrid Pipeline
def process_document(
content: str,
*,
llm_client=None,
confidence_threshold: float = 0.95,
) -> list[ParsedItem]:
"""Full pipeline: regex -> confidence check -> LLM for edge cases."""
# Step 1: Regex extraction (handles 95-98%)
items = parse_structured_text(content)
# Step 2: Confidence scoring
low_confidence = identify_low_confidence(items, confidence_threshold)
if not low_confidence or llm_client is None:
return items
…
FAQ
Why not just use artificial intelligence (LLM) for everything?
Using only AI can be expensive and slow. This method is more efficient because most of the work is done by a simpler and faster method, reserving AI for the most difficult cases.
What is 'regex'?
Regex (regular expression) is a sequence of characters that forms a search pattern. It's like a 'recipe' for finding specific texts within a larger document.
When should I use only AI (LLM) without regex?
If the text doesn't have a clear pattern and is very varied (like a free-form chat), AI alone is the best option.
Details
Original description by the author
Decision framework for parsing structured text (quizzes, forms, invoices, receipts, tables) with a hybrid regex-first pipeline — regex extraction handles 95%+ cheaply, a confidence scorer flags low-confidence items, and an LLM validator fixes only the edge cases. Use when choosing between regex and LLM for text extraction, building a cheap document parser, or optimizing extraction cost and accurac
repo: affaan-m/ECC
Popularity
- GitHub stars
- 280k
- Ranking position
- #116
- License
- MIT
- Updated
- 10/15/2026
Comments
- …
More skills from this repository
accessibility
Helps your agent create interfaces that everyone can use. Ensures websites and apps work well for people with disabilities, like those who are blind or have reduced mobility.
affaan-m/ECC
agent-architecture-audit
Makes your agent check if everything is working correctly. It finds and fixes problems in AI systems, ensuring they perform as expected.
affaan-m/ECC
agent-eval
Helps your agent compare different AI coding tools. It measures which one is faster, cheaper, and more reliable for specific tasks.
affaan-m/ECC
agent-harness-construction
Makes your agent better understand how to perform tasks. It optimizes the tools and instructions the agent uses to increase its chances of success.
affaan-m/ECC
Similar skills
mcp-builder
Helps your agent create servers that connect LLMs to external services. Essential for integrating APIs and services using Python or Node/TypeScript.
anthropics/skills
prepare-mcp-integration
Prepares vendor (MCP) integrations through research and human approval. It follows a guided process for new integrations.
paperclipai/paperclip
first-task
Guides the agent on the user's first task. It interprets the initial answer, clarifies the goal, and proposes a plan or single task for approval.
paperclipai/paperclip