cekura-metric-improvement

Improves voice agent evaluation metrics through structured feedback and the Cekura labs pipeline.

7|2|Updated Mar 6, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/cekura-ai/cekura-skills --skill cekura-metric-improvement-cekura-ai
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: cekura-metric-improvement
Source: https://github.com/cekura-ai/cekura-skills/tree/main/cekura/skills/cekura-metric-improvement
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/cekura-ai/cekura-skills --skill cekura-metric-improvement-cekura-ai

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill includes references (resource) components.

What problem does it solve? Voice agent evaluation metrics often produce false positives, false negatives, or inconsistent results after initial deployment. This Skill guides the iterative cycle of finding misaligned metric results, leaving structured feedback, running the Cekura labs auto-improve pipeline, and validating changes so metrics reach production quality. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Misalignment Detection: Review recent call evaluations to find false positives, false negatives, and unexpected N/A results across binary, workflow, and enum metrics. - Structured Feedback Workflow: Submit agree/disagree votes with transcript-grounded explanations via the mark_metric_vote endpoint, accumulating 6+ instances before auto-improvement. - Labs Auto-Improve Pipeline: Trigger process_feedbacks to generate improved metric prompts, then re-run evaluations on the same calls to validate fixes without regressions. - Use Case: A metric measuring one-question-per-turn keeps failing valid calls. Categorize the failure root causes, PATCH manual prompt fixes, leave feedback on remaining edge cases, run labs auto-improve, and re-evaluate a sample of calls to confirm accuracy. ## Quick Start Ask the assistant to review recent call evaluations for a specific metric, identify misaligned results, and leave feedback to start the labs improvement cycle.

Frequently Asked Questions about cekura-metric-improvement

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I improve a metric that keeps giving wrong results?

First categorize failure root causes from explanations and apply manual prompt fixes targeting dominant failure categories. Then leave structured feedback on remaining edge cases, accumulate at least 6 instances, and run the labs auto-improve pipeline to refine the metric prompt.

How to leave feedback on a Cekura metric result?

Retrieve the call to find the metric result, then POST to the mark_metric_vote endpoint with an agree or disagree vote plus an explanation. Good feedback references specific transcript timestamps, explains the reasoning, and states the correct expected outcome.

How much feedback is needed before running labs auto-improve?

Collect at least 6 feedback instances before triggering auto-improve via the process_feedbacks endpoint. This gives the labs pipeline enough signal to identify patterns and make meaningful prompt adjustments rather than overfitting to single cases.

Does the labs auto-improve apply changes to the metric automatically?

No, the process_feedbacks response returns an improved description and evaluation_trigger, but you must PATCH the metric yourself to apply the changes. Poll the process_feedbacks_progress endpoint with the returned progress_id to check completion.

When should I use manual prompt fixes instead of labs feedback?

Use manual fixes first when metrics have systemic issues like high false-fail rates from cross-pollination or overly broad failure conditions. Labs feedback is reserved for nuanced edge cases that remain after manual prompt edits are validated on a sample of calls.

Is there a limit on how many calls I can evaluate at once?

Yes, the skill enforces a cost guard requiring explicit user approval before evaluating more than 100 calls. Query the call count first with page_size=1, report it to the user, and use server-side filters to scope evaluations before proceeding.