agentic-eval

Evaluate and iteratively refine AI agent outputs through self-critique.

1|Updated Feb 24, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/xurenlu/marstaff --skill agentic-eval-xurenlu
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: agentic-eval
Source: https://github.com/xurenlu/marstaff/tree/main/skills/agentic-eval
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/xurenlu/marstaff --skill agentic-eval-xurenlu

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill includes scripts (resource) and references (resource) components.

What problem does it solve?

This Skill addresses the challenge of ensuring high-quality, accurate, and reliable outputs from AI agents by enabling them to evaluate and improve their own work iteratively.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Self-Critique & Reflection: Agents can analyze their own generated content against defined criteria.
  • Iterative Refinement: Supports loops where an agent refines its output based on self-generated critiques.
  • Evaluator-Optimizer Pipelines: Enables separation of generation, evaluation, and optimization roles for robust quality control.
  • Code-Specific Refinement: Includes patterns for test-driven code generation and fixing.
  • Use Case: Automatically refine generated code to pass unit tests, or improve a generated report by having the agent critique its own clarity and accuracy before final output.

Quick Start

Use the agentic-eval skill to refine the generated Python code for the given specification until it passes all tests.

Frequently Asked Questions about agentic-eval

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I use self-critique to improve AI agent outputs?

Self-critique improves AI agent outputs by applying iterative refinement patterns where agents analyze their generated content against defined criteria to enhance quality and accuracy.

What is an evaluator-optimizer pipeline for LLM-as-judge systems?

An evaluator-optimizer pipeline for LLM-as-judge systems separates generation, evaluation, and optimization roles to enable robust quality control and iterative refinement of AI outputs.

How do I refine generated code to pass unit tests using AI evaluation?

AI evaluation refines generated code to pass unit tests through test-driven code generation patterns that iteratively fix and improve outputs based on evaluation scores.

Does iterative refinement require structured output for reliable parsing?

Iterative refinement requires structured output for reliable parsing of critique results and evaluation scores to ensure the agent can accurately process self-generated feedback.

Can I evaluate AI-generated reports for clarity and accuracy before final output?

Evaluating AI-generated reports for clarity and accuracy before final output uses rubric-based evaluation where the agent critiques its own work against defined criteria.

What are the limitations of LLM-as-judge for code quality evaluation?

Limitations of LLM-as-judge for code quality evaluation include the dependency on structured output for reliable parsing and the need for defined criteria to drive effective self-critique loops.