llm-evaluation

Evaluate LLM outputs with automated metrics, human rubrics, and adversarial testing.

1|Updated Mar 21, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/kalilurrahman/kr-claudiator-skills-original-prompts --skill llm-evaluation-kalilurrahman
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: llm-evaluation
Source: https://github.com/kalilurrahman/kr-claudiator-skills-original-prompts/tree/main/04-ai-ml/llm-evaluation
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/kalilurrahman/kr-claudiator-skills-original-prompts --skill llm-evaluation-kalilurrahman

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill requires openai, nltk, rouge-score, bert-score, numpy.

What problem does it solve? Measuring LLM quality by intuition leads to unreliable deployments and undetected regressions. This Skill provides a systematic evaluation framework combining automated metrics, human evaluation rubrics, and adversarial testing so you can quantify model quality and catch failures before users do. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Automated Metrics: Compute exact match, F1, BLEU, ROUGE-L, and BERTScore against ground-truth test sets, plus LLM-as-judge scoring with GPT-4 for nuanced criteria like helpfulness. - Human Evaluation: Run pairwise A/B comparisons and Likert-scale ratings across accuracy, completeness, clarity, and conciseness dimensions. - Adversarial & Factuality Testing: Probe jailbreak resistance, hallucination rates on unanswerable questions, bias patterns, and claim-level factual verification. - Use Case: Before swapping GPT-3.5 for GPT-4 in a customer support bot, run a 500-example test set through the eval harness, compare category-level F1 scores, and use the regression detector to confirm no capability dropped more than 5%. ## Quick Start Build an evaluation harness for my customer support chatbot with a test set covering common queries, edge cases, and adversarial prompts, then report automated metrics and regression risks.

Frequently Asked Questions about llm-evaluation

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I evaluate LLM output quality automatically?

Build a test set with ground-truth answers, then compute metrics like exact match, token-overlap F1, ROUGE-L, and BERTScore for semantic similarity. For subjective qualities like helpfulness, use LLM-as-judge prompting with a scored rubric.

What is the difference between BLEU, ROUGE, and BERTScore?

BLEU measures n-gram precision against references, common in translation. ROUGE-L measures longest common subsequence overlap. BERTScore compares embedding similarity, catching semantic equivalence even when wording differs significantly.

How do I test if an LLM hallucinates answers?

Ask unanswerable questions, such as private facts or unknowable data, and check whether the model admits uncertainty with phrases like "I don't know." Counting fabricated responses gives a hallucination rate.

When should I use human evaluation instead of automated metrics?

Use human evaluation for nuanced criteria like helpfulness, clarity, and tone that string-overlap metrics cannot capture. Pairwise A/B comparison is more reliable than absolute ratings, and at least 100 examples are needed for statistical significance.

How do I detect regressions when upgrading LLM models?

Store baseline per-category metric results, then run the same test set against the new model. Flag any category where F1 drops beyond a threshold such as 0.05, since aggregate scores can hide category-level degradation.