evaluation

Build evaluation frameworks with multi-dimensional rubrics, test sets, and production monitoring for agent systems.

Updated Aug 7, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/Sambhav242005/Major-Project --skill evaluation-sambhav242005
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: evaluation
Source: https://github.com/Sambhav242005/Major-Project/tree/main/.agents/skills/evaluation
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/Sambhav242005/Major-Project --skill evaluation-sambhav242005

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

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

What problem does it solve? Agent systems are non-deterministic and lack single correct answers, making traditional software testing inadequate. This Skill provides a structured methodology and Python framework for measuring agent quality through outcome-based rubrics, regression detection, and continuous production monitoring. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Multi-Dimensional Rubric Scoring: Score agent outputs across factual accuracy, completeness, citation accuracy, source quality, and tool efficiency with configurable weights and pass thresholds. - Test Set Management: Build complexity-stratified test sets (simple to very complex) with tag-based filtering and distribution analysis to prevent easy cases from inflating scores. - Production Monitoring: Sample live interactions at configurable rates, track pass rates against warning (0.85) and critical (0.70) thresholds, and generate alerts for quality degradation. - Use Case: Before deploying an updated research agent, run a 50-case stratified test set through the EvaluationRunner, compare per-dimension scores against the baseline, and block deployment if factual accuracy regresses. ## Quick Start Use the evaluation skill to score my agent's outputs against a multi-dimensional rubric and summarize pass rates across a stratified test set.

Frequently Asked Questions about evaluation

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I evaluate an AI agent's output quality?

Score outputs against a multi-dimensional rubric covering factual accuracy, completeness, citation accuracy, source quality, and tool efficiency. Compute a weighted overall score and apply a pass threshold, typically 0.7 for general use and 0.9 for high-stakes applications.

How to build a test set for agent evaluation?

Start with 20-30 cases during early development and scale to at least 50 for reliable signal. Stratify cases across simple, medium, complex, and very complex levels, sample from real usage patterns, and report scores per stratum so easy cases do not inflate results.

Should I use LLM-as-judge or deterministic checks for agent evaluation?

Run deterministic validation first whenever the artifact has machine-checkable structure, such as schema validity or required files. Add LLM judgment only after deterministic checks and rubrics are stable, and use a different model family as judge to avoid self-enhancement bias.

How do I monitor agent quality in production?

Sample a fraction of live interactions, evaluate each sample, and track pass rate and average score over time. Set alerts when pass rate drops below 0.85 (warning) or 0.70 (critical), and review dashboards for gradual degradation trends.

Why does a single overall score hide agent failures?

One aggregate number averages away dimension-specific failures, such as high accuracy with poor tool efficiency. Always report per-dimension scores alongside the aggregate and fail the evaluation if any single dimension falls below its minimum threshold.

What are the limitations of small evaluation test sets?

Fewer than 50 examples produce unreliable signal with high variance between runs. Scale the test set to at least 50 cases, report confidence intervals, and keep eval data versioned and separate from prompts or fine-tuning data to avoid contamination.