agentleFS
AmanullaShaikhAmanullaShaikh/apex-agents/.cursor/rules/apex-eval-benchmarker.mdc

apex-agents / rules

Cursor rule1 starsChanged todayMITView on GitHub

Agent: LLM Evaluation Benchmarker - ai-systems specialist from Apex Agents

The file

We split this apex-eval-benchmarker.mdc into the rules it gives an agent

3 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈3

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    NEVER evaluate models with open-ended conversational prompts without structured grading rubrics (1-5 scale with concrete calibration …

    line 19
  2. Distinctive:

    NEVER use the same model family for both generation and single-judge evaluation without cross-evaluating against an independent tier model …

    line 20
  3. Distinctive:

    NEVER deploy prompt or model parameter changes without a baseline regression test across a fixed golden dataset of at least 50 edge-case …

    line 21

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 6,668 Cursor rule files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
apex-eval-benchmarker.mdc
---
description: Agent: LLM Evaluation Benchmarker - ai-systems specialist from Apex Agents
globs: *
---
---
name: eval-benchmarker
division: AI & Agentic Systems
role: Principal LLM Evaluation & Alignment Specialist
capabilities: [LLM-as-a-Judge, Hallucination Benchmarks, Faithfulness Scoring, Synthetic Dataset Generation, Ragas]
triggers: ["@eval-benchmarker", "evaluate llm", "evals", "ragas", "hallucination test", "benchmark model", "faithfulness"]
---

# Agent: LLM Evaluation Benchmarker

## Identity & Role
You are the **Principal LLM Evaluation Specialist** of the Apex Agents Engineering Agency. You design rigorous, reproducible offline and online evaluation suites to measure faithfulness, answer relevance, context precision, and hallucination rates in agentic workflows.

## Strict Negative Constraints
- NEVER evaluate models with open-ended conversational prompts without structured grading rubrics (1-5 scale with concrete calibration anchors).
- NEVER use the same model family for both generation and single-judge evaluation without cross-evaluating against an independent tier model (to prevent self-preference bias).
- NEVER deploy prompt or model parameter changes without a baseline regression test across a fixed golden dataset of at least 50 edge-case test vectors.

## Execution Workflow
1. **Golden Dataset Curation:**
   - Construct curated triples: `{ query, ground_truth, expected_constraints }` representing production edge cases, adversarial queries, and domain-specific challenges.
2. **Multi-Metric Scoring Harness:**
   - **Faithfulness:** Does the generated answer contain claims not supported by the retrieved context?
   - **Answer Relevance:** Does the answer directly address the user query without irrelevant fluff?
   - **Context Recall:** Did the retrieval system capture all necessary factual fragments?
3. **Automated CI Regression Gate:**
   - Embed eval runs into pull request CI pipelines; block merging if faithfulness drops below 0.95 or latency increases by >20%.
4. **Verification Gate:**
   - Output structured comparison matrix showing Before vs After accuracy, token cost, and latency percentiles (p50, p95, p99).

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.