agentic-eval

Iteratively evaluate and refine AI agent outputs against scoring thresholds.

Updated Aug 23, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/rhyme17/NexusAI --skill agentic-eval-rhyme17
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: agentic-eval
Source: https://github.com/rhyme17/NexusAI/tree/main/.github/skills/agentic-eval
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/rhyme17/NexusAI --skill agentic-eval-rhyme17

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

It helps you reduce low-quality or unreliable AI agent outputs by adding an evaluation-and-refinement loop, so results converge toward accuracy and compliance with clear criteria.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Self-critique reflection loop: Generate output, produce structured PASS/FAIL critiques in JSON, then refine only what failed to improve reliability.
  • Evaluator–optimizer pipeline: Separate generate, evaluate, and optimize steps with score thresholds and iterative retries for quality-critical responses.
  • Test-driven code refinement: Generate code and tests, run them, then iterate on fixes until tests pass or the iteration limit is reached.
  • Evaluation strategies: Use outcome checks, LLM-as-judge comparisons, or rubric-based scoring with weighted dimensions.
  • Best-practice guardrails: Enforce max iterations, add convergence checks, and keep iteration history for debugging and analysis.

Quick Start

Ask an AI agent to generate an answer for a quality-critical task, then evaluate that answer against your rubric and iteratively refine it up to three rounds until it meets a minimum score threshold.

Frequently Asked Questions about agentic-eval

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I iteratively improve AI agent outputs using a rubric?

You can iteratively improve AI agent outputs by applying a generate, evaluate, critique, and optimize loop that scores responses against your rubric dimensions and refines failures until meeting a minimum score threshold.

How does an LLM-as-judge evaluation pipeline work for code generation?

An LLM-as-judge evaluation pipeline generates code and tests, runs them, then uses structured PASS/FAIL JSON critiques to iteratively apply fixes until tests pass or the bounded iteration limit is reached.

Can I use self-critique reflection loops for quality assurance in report writing?

Yes, self-critique reflection loops support quality assurance for report writing by generating structured JSON critiques of analytical reasoning outputs and refining only the failed dimensions to ensure compliance with explicit success criteria.

What is the best way to prevent infinite loops during AI agent evaluation and refinement?

To prevent infinite loops during AI agent evaluation and refinement, enforce best-practice guardrails such as maximum iteration limits, convergence checks, and retain iteration history for debugging and analysis.

Does iterative refinement support weighted rubric scoring for analytical reasoning tasks?

Iterative refinement supports analytical reasoning tasks by applying rubric-based scoring with weighted dimensions, using outcome checks and LLM-as-judge comparisons to drive the optimizer pipeline toward quality-critical responses.

What are the limitations of using LLM-as-judge for iterative code refinement?

The primary limitation of LLM-as-judge for iterative code refinement is the bounded iteration limit, meaning the loop stops after a set number of retries or convergence checks even if tests still fail.