Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索需要联网github未标认证来源可访问clear审计未展示

evaluationevaluation 搜索

Agent Skill

evaluation 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

总安装

303

周安装

13

GitHub Stars

公开资料未说明

下载量

106
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

MIT

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:evaluation(evaluation 搜索)
来源仓库:https://github.com/5dlabs/cto
仓库路径:skills/evaluation
安装命令:
npx skills add 5dlabs/cto --skill "evaluation"
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

AgentSkills.tonpx skills
npx skills add 5dlabs/cto --skill "evaluation"

简介

evaluation 用于通用评估任务支持,辅助量化判断。

  • 适用于性能打分、质量评级或多指标权衡场景。
  • 通过 npx skills add 5dlabs/cto --skill "evaluation" 安装,建议提供评分细则。
  • 使用前需校准指标权重与归一化方法。
  • 应结合人工经验修正模型偏差。evaluation 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

SKILL.md

Evaluation Methods for Agent Systems

Evaluation of agent systems requires different approaches than traditional software or even standard language model applications. Agents make dynamic decisions, are non-deterministic between runs, and often lack single correct answers. Effective evaluation must account for these characteristics while providing actionable feedback.

When to Activate

Activate this skill when:

  • Testing agent performance systematically
  • Validating context engineering choices
  • Measuring improvements over time
  • Catching regressions before deployment
  • Building quality gates for agent pipelines
  • Comparing different agent configurations
  • Evaluating production systems continuously

Core Concepts

Agent evaluation requires outcome-focused approaches that account for non-determinism and multiple valid paths. Multi-dimensional rubrics capture various quality aspects: factual accuracy, completeness, citation accuracy, source quality, and tool efficiency. LLM-as-judge provides scalable evaluation while human evaluation catches edge cases.

The key insight is that agents may find alternative paths to goals—the evaluation should judge whether they achieve right outcomes while following reasonable processes.

Performance Drivers: The 95% Finding

Research found that three factors explain 95% of performance variance:

FactorVariance ExplainedImplication
Token usage80%More tokens = better performance
Number of tool calls~10%More exploration helps
Model choice~5%Better models multiply efficiency

Evaluation Challenges

Non-Determinism and Multiple Valid Paths Agents may take completely different valid paths to reach goals. The solution is outcome-focused evaluation that judges whether agents achieve right outcomes while following reasonable processes.

Context-Dependent Failures Agent failures often depend on context in subtle ways. Evaluation must cover a range of complexity levels and test extended interactions, not just isolated queries.

Composite Quality Dimensions Agent quality includes factual accuracy, completeness, coherence, tool efficiency, and process quality. Evaluation rubrics must capture multiple dimensions with appropriate weighting.

Evaluation Rubric Design

Multi-Dimensional Rubric

DimensionExcellentGoodFailed
Factual accuracyClaims match ground truthMinor errorsFalse claims
CompletenessCovers all aspectsCovers mostMissing key info
Citation accuracyAll citations matchMost matchWrong citations
Source qualityPrimary sourcesSecondary OKPoor sources
Tool efficiencyOptimal tool useSome wasteMany wasted calls

Rubric Scoring

Convert dimension assessments to numeric scores (0.0 to 1.0) with appropriate weighting. Calculate weighted overall scores. Determine passing threshold based on use case requirements.

Evaluation Methodologies

LLM-as-Judge

LLM-based evaluation scales to large test sets and provides consistent judgments. The key is designing effective evaluation prompts that capture the dimensions of interest.

Provide clear task description, agent output, ground truth (if available), evaluation scale with level descriptions, and request structured judgment.

Human Evaluation

Human evaluation catches what automation misses. Humans notice hallucinated answers on unusual queries, system failures, and subtle biases that automated evaluation misses.

End-State Evaluation

For agents that mutate persistent state, end-state evaluation focuses on whether the final state matches expectations rather than how the agent got there.

Test Set Design

Complexity Stratification

Test sets should span complexity levels:

  • Simple: Single tool call
  • Medium: Multiple tool calls
  • Complex: Many tool calls, significant ambiguity
  • Very Complex: Extended interaction, deep reasoning
test_set = [
    {
        "name": "simple_lookup",
        "input": "What is the capital of France?",
        "expected": {"type": "fact", "answer": "Paris"},
        "complexity": "simple"
    },
    {
        "name": "multi_step_reasoning",
        "input": "Analyze sales data from Q1-Q4 and create summary with trends",
        "complexity": "complex"
    }
]

Context Engineering Evaluation

Testing Context Strategies Context engineering choices should be validated through systematic evaluation. Run agents with different context strategies on the same test set. Compare quality scores, token usage, and efficiency metrics.

Degradation Testing Test how context degradation affects performance by running agents at different context sizes. Identify performance cliffs. Establish safe operating limits.

Guidelines

  1. Use multi-dimensional rubrics, not single metrics
  2. Evaluate outcomes, not specific execution paths
  3. Cover complexity levels from simple to complex
  4. Test with realistic context sizes and histories
  5. Run evaluations continuously, not just before release
  6. Supplement LLM evaluation with human review
  7. Track metrics over time for trend detection
  8. Set clear pass/fail thresholds based on use case

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

04

需要参考平台分布和安装热度时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

补充不同宿主或平台的使用分布数据

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

Claude Code

28.17%
按下载量换算30

windsurf

20.94%
按下载量换算22

trae

19.01%
按下载量换算20

OpenCode

11.72%
按下载量换算12

Codex

7.87%
按下载量换算8

Antigravity

3.27%
按下载量换算3

安全审计

暂无安全审计结果可展示。

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills