Generated banner for Agentic Eval
Generated logo for Agentic Eval

Agentic Eval

GitHubOfficialContributed by @hashwnath via pull request #591Distributed by GitHub

  • Skill
  • Guidelines
  • Agent tooling
  • MIT
  • No issues found

From the author

Patterns and techniques for evaluating and improving AI agent outputs. Use this skill when: - Implementing self-critique and reflection loops - Building evaluator-optimizer pipelines for quality-critical generation - Creating test-driven code refinement workflows - Designing rubric-based or LLM-as-judge evaluation systems - Adding iterative improvement to agent outputs (code, reports, analysis) - Measuring and improving agent response quality
— the description by hashwnath

AutoGineer summary

Written by AutoGineer from the skill’s own files, not by the author

Agentic Evaluation provides a framework for moving beyond single-shot AI generation by implementing iterative refinement loops. It details how to structure agent workflows so they can evaluate their own outputs, critique performance against defined rubrics, and optimize results until they meet specific quality thresholds. The skill covers various patterns including self-reflection, evaluator-optimizer separation, and test-driven code refinement, supported by best practices for structured output and convergence management.

What it does

  • Defines patterns for self-critique and reflection loops
  • Provides structures for evaluator-optimizer pipelines
  • Outlines test-driven refinement workflows for code generation
  • Demonstrates rubric-based scoring and LLM-as-judge techniques
  • Offers a checklist for implementing and monitoring iterative improvement
  • Provides best practices for managing iteration limits and convergence

When to use it

  • When building agents that require high accuracy for code, reports, or analysis
  • When tasks have clear, measurable success criteria
  • When outputs must adhere to specific style guides, compliance, or formatting standards
  • When you need to reduce errors in agent-generated content through iterative cycles

Advantages

  • Increases output reliability through automated verification
  • Enables agents to self-correct based on specific feedback
  • Provides a structured approach to quality control in agent workflows
  • Reduces manual oversight by automating the evaluation process

Usage examples

“How can I make my agent improve its own code output?”
The agent will implement a CodeReflector pattern that generates code, creates pytest tests, and enters a loop to fix errors based on test results until success is achieved.
“How do I evaluate if my agent's report meets my quality standards?”
The agent will use a rubric-based evaluation pattern to score the report against weighted dimensions like accuracy and clarity, returning a quantitative score.

Install

  1. Download the skill as a ZIP:

    https://autogineer.com/agent-skills/github/agentic-eval/download
  2. Unzip it into the cross-client skills folder of your project:

    mkdir -p .agents/skills && unzip agentic-eval.zip -d .agents/skills

Documentation by hashwnath

Agentic Evaluation Patterns

Patterns for self-improvement through iterative evaluation and refinement.

Overview

Evaluation patterns enable agents to assess and improve their own outputs, moving beyond single-shot generation to iterative refinement loops.

Generate → Evaluate → Critique → Refine → Output
    ↑                              │
    └──────────────────────────────┘

When to Use

  • Quality-critical generation: Code, reports, analysis requiring high accuracy

  • Tasks with clear evaluation criteria: Defined success metrics exist

  • Content requiring specific standards: Style guides, compliance, formatting


Pattern 1: Basic Reflection

Agent evaluates and improves its own output through self-critique.

def reflect_and_refine(task: str, criteria: list[str], max_iterations: int = 3) -> str:
    """Generate with reflection loop."""
    output = llm(f"Complete this task:\n{task}")
    
    for i in range(max_iterations):
        # Self-critique
        critique = llm(f"""
        Evaluate this output against criteria: {criteria}
        Output: {output}
        Rate each: PASS/FAIL with feedback as JSON.
        """)
        
        critique_data = json.loads(critique)
        all_pass = all(c["status"] == "PASS" for c in critique_data.values())
        if all_pass:
            return output
        
        # Refine based on critique
        failed = {k: v["feedback"] for k, v in critique_data.items() if v["status"] == "FAIL"}
        output = llm(f"Improve to address: {failed}\nOriginal: {output}")
    
    return output

Key insight: Use structured JSON output for reliable parsing of critique results.


Pattern 2: Evaluator-Optimizer

Separate generation and evaluation into distinct components for clearer responsibilities.

class EvaluatorOptimizer:
    def __init__(self, score_threshold: float = 0.8):
        self.score_threshold = score_threshold
    
    def generate(self, task: str) -> str:
        return llm(f"Complete: {task}")
    
    def evaluate(self, output: str, task: str) -> dict:
        return json.loads(llm(f"""
        Evaluate output for task: {task}
        Output: {output}
        Return JSON: {{"overall_score": 0-1, "dimensions": {{"accuracy": ..., "clarity": ...}}}}
        """))
    
    def optimize(self, output: str, feedback: dict) -> str:
        return llm(f"Improve based on feedback: {feedback}\nOutput: {output}")
    
    def run(self, task: str, max_iterations: int = 3) -> str:
        output = self.generate(task)
        for _ in range(max_iterations):
            evaluation = self.evaluate(output, task)
            if evaluation["overall_score"] >= self.score_threshold:
                break
            output = self.optimize(output, evaluation)
        return output

Pattern 3: Code-Specific Reflection

Test-driven refinement loop for code generation.

class CodeReflector:
    def reflect_and_fix(self, spec: str, max_iterations: int = 3) -> str:
        code = llm(f"Write Python code for: {spec}")
        tests = llm(f"Generate pytest tests for: {spec}\nCode: {code}")
        
        for _ in range(max_iterations):
            result = run_tests(code, tests)
            if result["success"]:
                return code
            code = llm(f"Fix error: {result['error']}\nCode: {code}")
        return code

Evaluation Strategies

Outcome-Based

Evaluate whether output achieves the expected result.

def evaluate_outcome(task: str, output: str, expected: str) -> str:
    return llm(f"Does output achieve expected outcome? Task: {task}, Expected: {expected}, Output: {output}")
LLM-as-Judge

Use LLM to compare and rank outputs.

def llm_judge(output_a: str, output_b: str, criteria: str) -> str:
    return llm(f"Compare outputs A and B for {criteria}. Which is better and why?")
Rubric-Based

Score outputs against weighted dimensions.

RUBRIC = {
    "accuracy": {"weight": 0.4},
    "clarity": {"weight": 0.3},
    "completeness": {"weight": 0.3}
}

def evaluate_with_rubric(output: str, rubric: dict) -> float:
    scores = json.loads(llm(f"Rate 1-5 for each dimension: {list(rubric.keys())}\nOutput: {output}"))
    return sum(scores[d] * rubric[d]["weight"] for d in rubric) / 5

Best Practices

PracticeRationale
Clear criteriaDefine specific, measurable evaluation criteria upfront
Iteration limitsSet max iterations (3-5) to prevent infinite loops
Convergence checkStop if output score isn't improving between iterations
Log historyKeep full trajectory for debugging and analysis
Structured outputUse JSON for reliable parsing of evaluation results

Quick Start Checklist

## Evaluation Implementation Checklist

### Setup
- [ ] Define evaluation criteria/rubric
- [ ] Set score threshold for "good enough"
- [ ] Configure max iterations (default: 3)

### Implementation
- [ ] Implement generate() function
- [ ] Implement evaluate() function with structured output
- [ ] Implement optimize() function
- [ ] Wire up the refinement loop

### Safety
- [ ] Add convergence detection
- [ ] Log all iterations for debugging
- [ ] Handle evaluation parse failures gracefully

Files

Requirements and compatibility

Written for: GitHub Copilot

Works with: Claude Code, Claude apps, OpenAI Codex, GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Gemini CLI, Kiro, OpenCode, Goose, Amp, Roo Code, JetBrains Junie, Factory Droid, Devin (ex-Windsurf), Mistral Vibe, OpenHands, Letta

“Works with” means the tool reads the open Agent Skills format; a skill written for one tool may use features others lack.

Needs: Needs Python

Security

No issues found by our static scan· No issues found

A static scan is not a guarantee. Skills are third-party content: review a skill before you let an agent use it.

Attribution and licence

Contributed by
GitHub avatar of hashwnath@hashwnathvia pull request #591
Publisher
GitHub (Official)
Distributed by
GitHub
Source
github/awesome-copilot · skills/agentic-eval · commit 797337f
Licence
MIT License (redistribution allowed)
  • LICENSE (added by AutoGineer from LICENSE)
  • ATTRIBUTION.md (written by AutoGineer)
Synced

AutoGineer is not affiliated with or endorsed by hashwnath or GitHub.

Download ZIP

The ZIP holds the skill’s files, its licence files and an ATTRIBUTION.md. Download agentic-eval.zip