agentleFS
agno-agiagno-agi/agentos-render/.agents/skills/create-evals/SKILL.md

create-evals

Skill5 starsChanged 2 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub

Author eval coverage for an agent in this AgentOS — map what the agent promises, mine real sessions and eval history from Postgres for scenarios, propose capabilities worth testing, then write, run, and audit Case entries in evals/cases.py. Use when the user wants evals created, coverage added, or an agent's behavior pinned down as tests. For failing suites or agent hardening, use improve instead.

  • Reads credentials

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

4 rules. About 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈0

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 4

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    Before cases that use MCP, inspect evals/__main__.py: it currently collects MCP tools from OS Manager.

    line 20
  2. Very specific:

    Read the file (or the published config: get_postgres_db().get_config(component_id="<id>")["config"]).

    line 27
  3. Very specific:

    Run every case through python -m evals, which uses the application's .env, database and workspace.

    line 29
  4. Very specific:

    Use Agno's built-in criteria and expected_tool_calls.

    line 32

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 308,232 skill 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
SKILL.md

Create Evals

Coding-agent workflow: run as /create-evals or by describing the task.

Turn what an agent promises into Case entries in evals/cases.py. The template's cases cover the reference components only; a user-built agent is invisible to the suite until this skill writes one. Failing suite → improve; harden an agent → improve.

Preconditions: configured PostgreSQL reachable, venv active (source .venv/bin/activate; ./scripts/venv_setup.sh if missing), .env populated. Even CLI --help/--list imports application knowledge storage and requires PostgreSQL; no API server is needed for native agent/team cases.

Be self-driving: the repo and the database answer most questions. Ask the user only what they alone know — which jobs matter and which failures would hurt. One pick per exchange, recommendation first.

1. Pick the agent

The user's choice, or the least-covered component — almost always one of theirs. Source components have a file under agents/ or teams/. Studio-built components have none: Agent.load("<id>", db=get_postgres_db(), registry=registry, published_only=True) (or Team.load) rehydrates the published config at import time; it returns None for an archived or unpublished component, and a Case with neither field set raises — guard the load or the whole suite fails at import. Workflows cannot be case targets.

Before cases that use MCP, inspect evals/__main__.py: it currently collects MCP tools from OS Manager. Ensure the target's required MCP tools are connected in the eval loop; API-side connections do not carry into a separate CLI process. Use the pinned framework collection helpers in the existing entrypoint when additional target tools are needed.

2. Map what it promises

Read the file (or the published config: get_postgres_db().get_config(component_id="<id>")["config"]). Every "always", "never", "use X for Y" is a case. Note the tools for reliability assertions.

Run every case through python -m evals, which uses the application's .env, database and workspace. Sessions and results persist. Do not mutate existing user components as fixtures; mutating cases need explicitly owned fixtures. Use Agno's built-in criteria and expected_tool_calls. Keep generic Agno behavior in framework coverage; do not add custom scorers, isolation or cleanup machinery to the starter by default.

3. Mine the platform

from db import get_postgres_db
db = get_postgres_db()
sessions, _ = db.get_sessions(component_id="<agent-id>", limit=20, deserialize=False)
asks = [run["input"]["input_content"] for s in sessions for run in (s.get("runs") or []) if run.get("input")]
evals, _ = db.get_eval_runs(limit=20, deserialize=False)

Sanitize private details before using session content in fixtures. Real asks make useful inputs. A recorded answer is a scenario, never a golden answer — the rubric states the timeless shape of a correct answer (a version or date enters as "a current X with a source", never as the value). No sessions is fine: derive from INSTRUCTIONS.

4. Propose what to test

2–3 capabilities, each with a one-line scenario and what a pass proves; lead with the one closest to the core job or hit most in sessions. Skip what the suite already covers. One exchange.

5. Write the case

Inside CASES after the marker # --- Your cases — authored by /create-evals --- (add it if missing). Names must be unique across the file.

Case(
    name="<agent>_<capability>",
    agent=<the_agent>,   # a Team goes in team= — nothing catches a team in agent=; it runs, misfiled
    input="<scenario>",
    tags=("<smoke|release|live>",),  # model calls; choose smoke, release or live deliberately
    timeout_seconds=90,
    user_id="<unique-fixture-user>",
    criteria="<specific, falsifiable>",
    expected_tool_calls=("<tool>",),
)

Pair answer criteria with expected_tool_calls when a tool is required. Tool-call checks verify invocation, not successful payloads or persisted state; inspect those when auditing a run rather than claiming the built-in check proves them.

Use unique fixture names and users. A fixture user does not isolate global tools or external services. External mutations (messages, files, third-party APIs) require authorization and containment or must stay outside the suite. Additional tool calls are allowed by default; a read-only prompt is not an execution restriction.

6. Run and audit

python -m evals --name <case>

Run through python -m evals; results persist in the application's database for the UI. Read both sides of the verdict: the response and tools fired, and judge_reason (--json-output). Repeat when a changed prompt, an unstable verdict or a specific reliability question justifies the extra calls. Replace vague criteria such as "compact" with observable expectations; investigate conflicting verdicts. If the agent, not the case, is wrong, say so — that's improve.

Loop to Step 4 or finish.

7. Hand over

New cases by name and tag, git diff evals/cases.py, suggested commit eval(<agent>): …. smoke cases run on demand through python -m evals; failures go to /improve.

Download now (ZIP)

  • Other versions4 projects use a version of this.

    Word for word · 3

    1. agno-agi/agentos-railway★ 41100% same
    2. agno-agi/agentos-docker★ 14100% same
    3. agno-agi/agentos-fly★ 4100% same

    Edited · 1

    1. agno-agi/agentos-helm★ 159% same

    Wrote their own version · 0

    None found.

    How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.

  • In this repository7 other files it gives its agents.

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.