How would you structure a simple AI chat MVP (architecture-wise)?

[ILYAS-dev-07]

Body

Hi everyone,

I’m working on a small AI chat project as an early MVP.
The focus is not on heavy ML, but on clean architecture and system design.

I’m currently thinking about how to structure the core logic, for example:

input handling

response generation

basic context / memory

different chat modes

From an architectural point of view, how would you split such a system into modules for a first version?

No code needed — I’m interested in design thinking and trade-offs.

Guidelines

• I have read and understood this category's guidelines before making this post.

[midiakiasat]

For an MVP, I’d optimize for clear boundaries and cheap change, not “AI cleverness”.

A simple, durable split looks like this:

1. Interface / Input Layer
   Responsible only for transport (HTTP, CLI, UI events).
   No business logic, no AI assumptions.

2. Conversation Orchestrator (Core)
   The brain of the system.
   Decides what happens next based on input, mode, and context.
   This is where routing, chat modes, and high-level flow live.

3. Context / State Module
   Manages conversation history, short-term memory, and pruning strategy.
   Treat memory as a dependency, not a global — easy to swap later.

4. Response Generation Adapter
   A thin boundary around whatever generates responses (LLM, rules, mocks).
   The core never knows how responses are produced.

5. Policy / Mode Layer (optional but useful)
   Encodes differences like “assistant vs tutor vs strict mode” as constraints, not branches.

Key trade-off:
Keep the orchestrator dumb about implementation and smart about flow.
That lets you replace memory strategy, models, or interfaces without rewiring the system.

For an MVP, this is enough structure to scale without premature complexity.

[ILYAS-dev-07]

Hi Midiakiasat,

Thank you for your response — it really helped me see different approaches.
I’m currently looking for a partner to develop this project further.
If you’re interested, I could give a small practical task to see how you think in a real scenario.

Would you be interested in trying it out?

[midiakiasat]

Hi ILYAS,

Thanks, glad it helped.

I keep GitHub Community threads focused on technical Q&A, so I don’t take “trial tasks” inside the discussion thread. If you want to evaluate fit, the clean path is:

1. Share a public repo link (or a short spec) with scope, constraints, and success criteria.
2. Define whether this is paid work or open-source collaboration (and what “done” means).
3. Then we can move to a dedicated channel (repo issue / email) and proceed.

If you have a concrete architecture follow-up, happy to keep it here.

Best regards.

[ILYAS-dev-07]

Thanks for your interest. To make it easier to communicate and share details, you can reach me on Telegram: @ilyas_GG.

Just to clarify upfront — this is not paid work. I’m looking for a partner to collaborate on a long-term tech project. Once we connect, I can share a small task to see how we work together.

[healer0805]

For an early MVP, I'd keep the structure simple and intentional, not over-engineered.

I'd usually split it into a few clear responsibilities:

• "Input layer" – takes user input, normalizes it, and does basic validation. No business logic here.
• "Core conversation logic" – this is the brain. It decides -what happens next- based on input, mode, and context.
• "Context / memory" – a thin layer that stores recent messages or state. Keep it dumb at first so it's easy to swap later.
• "Response generation" – given a decision from the core, this builds the final response (text, metadata, etc.).
• "Modes / strategies" – different chat behaviors plugged in as strategies, not conditionals everywhere.

The main trade-off early on is "flexibility vs simplicity". For a first version, I'd optimize for clarity and changeability. Flat modules with clean boundaries beat clever abstractions.

If you can trace a message end-to-end in your head in 30 seconds, you're probably doing it right. You can always split things further once real usage shows where the pressure points are.

[ILYAS-dev-07]

Hi Healer,

Thank you for your response — it really helped me see different approaches.
I’m currently looking for a partner to develop this project further.
If you’re interested, I could give a small practical task to see how you think in a real scenario.

Would you be interested in trying it out?

[healer0805]

Yeah, As a developer, I am interested in working with you.
I am an eager learner and self-starter.
Please share what you said so that I can figure it out.

[ILYAS-dev-07]

Thanks for your interest. To make it easier to communicate and share details, you can reach me on Telegram: @ilyas_GG.

Just to clarify upfront — this is not paid work. I’m looking for a partner to collaborate on a long-term tech project. Once we connect, I can share a small task to see how we work together.