Surreal conceptual artwork of a man on stairs with a light bulb inside a human head representing the thinking and reasoning process — Photo by Getty Images on Unsplash

What Is Chain-of-Thought Reasoning?

Q: What is chain-of-thought prompting in simple terms?

Chain-of-thought prompting instructs a language model to show its reasoning steps before giving a final answer, rather than jumping straight to a conclusion. This intermediate reasoning process improves accuracy on complex tasks because the model can catch and correct errors as it works through the problem.

Q: What is the difference between zero-shot and few-shot chain-of-thought?

Zero-shot CoT adds a simple instruction like 'Let's think step by step' to the prompt without providing examples. Few-shot CoT provides worked examples that demonstrate the step-by-step reasoning pattern the model should follow. Few-shot generally produces more reliable reasoning chains for domain-specific or complex tasks.

Q: Does chain-of-thought prompting work with all language models?

Chain-of-thought prompting is most effective with models that have sufficient scale and reasoning capability, generally models with billions of parameters. Smaller models often generate plausible-sounding but incorrect reasoning chains. Dedicated reasoning models like OpenAI o3 and Anthropic's extended thinking models are built specifically to improve this behavior.

Quick Definition#

Chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning is a prompting technique that asks a language model to produce intermediate reasoning steps before arriving at a final answer. Rather than jumping from question to conclusion, the model generates a sequence of logical steps — a chain of thoughts — that make its reasoning process visible and verifiable.

For AI agents, chain-of-thought reasoning is foundational. It improves accuracy on complex tasks and makes agent behavior more interpretable. To understand how CoT fits into the broader execution cycle, see The Agent Loop and AI Agent Planning. Browse the full AI Agents Glossary for all related reasoning and prompting terms.

Why Chain-of-Thought Reasoning Matters#

Large language models have a tendency to pattern-match toward plausible-sounding answers without working through intermediate steps. This produces confident but incorrect outputs on tasks that require logical reasoning, multi-step calculation, or structured decision-making.

Chain-of-thought prompting addresses this by forcing an intermediate step: the model must externalize its reasoning before committing to an answer. This intermediate output can be checked, corrected, or used as input for the next stage in an agent pipeline.

For teams building agents that need to make reliable multi-step decisions, CoT is often the difference between an agent that sounds confident and one that is actually correct. For a platform-level view of where reasoning capabilities vary, see Best AI Agent Platforms in 2026.

Zero-Shot vs. Few-Shot Chain-of-Thought#

Zero-Shot CoT#

Zero-shot CoT adds a brief instruction to the prompt to trigger step-by-step reasoning without providing examples. The most commonly cited form is appending "Let's think step by step" to the prompt.

This approach is simple to implement and often effective for general reasoning tasks. It works because large language models have been exposed to step-by-step reasoning patterns in training data and can activate that behavior with a simple cue.

Example:

Prompt without CoT: "A customer ordered 3 items at $12 each with a 10% discount. What is the total?"

Prompt with zero-shot CoT: "A customer ordered 3 items at $12 each with a 10% discount. What is the total? Let's think step by step."

The second version prompts the model to compute subtotal first, then apply the discount, reducing arithmetic errors.

Few-Shot CoT#

Few-shot CoT provides worked examples in the prompt that demonstrate the reasoning pattern the model should follow. Each example shows an input, a step-by-step reasoning chain, and the final answer.

This approach requires more prompt engineering upfront but produces more consistent and domain-specific reasoning. It is especially valuable for:

Financial calculations
Policy reasoning with multiple conditions
Structured data analysis
Technical troubleshooting workflows

For practical implementation in agent workflows, see Build an AI Agent with LangChain.

Chain-of-Thought in Agent Pipelines#

In an agent context, chain-of-thought reasoning typically appears at the thinking phase of the Agent Loop. Before selecting a tool or taking an action, the agent generates a chain of thought that:

Assesses the current state
Evaluates available options
Selects the most appropriate next action
Anticipates what the result should look like

This reasoning chain is often logged for debugging and can be surfaced to users as an explanation of agent decisions. Frameworks like LangChain expose this through structured output objects, making it possible to trace exactly why an agent chose a particular action.

Chain-of-Thought and AI Agent Planning#

AI Agent Planning uses chain-of-thought reasoning as a core mechanism for task decomposition. When an agent receives a complex goal, it can generate a CoT that breaks the goal into subtasks, identifies dependencies between them, and produces an execution order. This plan then drives subsequent loop iterations.

The relationship between CoT and planning is important: CoT improves the quality of individual reasoning steps, while planning structures the sequence of those steps into a coherent multi-step workflow.

Relationship to Reasoning Models#

Dedicated Reasoning Models like OpenAI o1, o3, and Anthropic's extended thinking variants are built on the insight that more time spent on intermediate reasoning produces better answers. These models run extended chain-of-thought reasoning internally before generating output.

The practical difference for agent builders:

Standard models with CoT prompting: reasoning chain is visible in the prompt, explicit, and controllable
Reasoning models: extended internal CoT happens automatically, output reflects more computation, but internal steps may not be fully exposed

For tasks where accuracy is critical and latency is acceptable, reasoning models offer significant quality improvements over standard models with manual CoT prompting.

Limitations and Failure Modes#

Faithful but wrong#

A model can generate a plausible-looking reasoning chain that contains subtle errors, leading to a wrong conclusion that appears well-supported. CoT improves accuracy on average but does not eliminate errors.

Verbose and slow#

CoT increases token generation, which raises latency and cost. In high-frequency production workflows, teams must balance reasoning depth against performance requirements.

Gaming the chain#

In some cases, models produce reasoning that post-hoc justifies an answer they would have given anyway, rather than genuinely computing through the problem. Evaluation of CoT quality requires testing on problems where the correct intermediate steps can be verified.

Implementation Guidance#

Use zero-shot CoT as a starting point for general reasoning tasks.
Move to few-shot CoT when domain-specific accuracy is required.
Log reasoning chains in production for error analysis.
Evaluate agent performance with and without CoT to quantify improvement.
Consider reasoning models for tasks where quality matters more than latency.
Use Agent Evaluation metrics to measure CoT impact on task completion rates.

Frequently Asked Questions#

What is chain-of-thought prompting in simple terms?#

Chain-of-thought prompting asks the model to show its reasoning steps before giving a final answer. This intermediate reasoning improves accuracy because the model can work through the problem rather than pattern-matching to a quick conclusion.

What is the difference between zero-shot and few-shot chain-of-thought?#

Zero-shot CoT adds a phrase like "Let's think step by step" without examples. Few-shot CoT provides worked examples showing the reasoning pattern to follow. Few-shot generally produces more consistent results for domain-specific tasks.

Does chain-of-thought prompting work with all language models?#

It is most effective with large, capable models. Smaller models often generate incorrect reasoning chains. Dedicated reasoning models are purpose-built to improve this behavior at scale.

Term Snapshot