agentleFS
aioceanaiocean/claude-plugins/.claude/skills/skill-eval/SKILL.md

skill-eval

Skill4 starsChanged 18 days agoMITView on GitHub

Use when checking whether a plugin skill in this repo actually works on a real agent — does it trigger on the right prompts, stay quiet on unrelated ones, and produce better output than no skill or than its previous version. Also use before releasing a skill change, when a RED baseline is needed, or when the user says "eval this skill", "benchmark the skill", "test with a real agent", "with vs without skill", "did my skill edit help".

21 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use mutation-test, postmortem and 5 more.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • squall-chuaSkill

    mutation-test

    Break the source on purpose, find the mutants the tests fail to catch, and report each survivor with the behaviour nobody is checking.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • Hongyu-yuSkill

    postmortem

    Use when analyzing failures, outages, incidents, or negative outcomes, conducting blameless postmortems, documenting root causes with 5 Whys or fishbone diagrams, identifying corrective actions with owners and timelines, learning from near-misses, establishing prevention strategies, or when user mentions postmortem, incident review, failure analysis, RCA, lessons learned, or after-action review.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • nicolasestremSkill

    brainstorm

    Structured idea generation and solution exploration with systematic analysis.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • MicrosoftSkill

    handoff

    Compact the current conversation into a handoff document for another agent to pick up.

    Also in 5 projects that use this

  • NVIDIASkill

    research

    Before designing a feature, research how comparable libraries solve the problem, check best practices, known pitfalls, and upstream changes. Use when starting a new feature, investigating an unfamiliar area, or the user asks to research something.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • SentrySkill

    review

    Fixture review skill.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

1 rule. 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 19 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 0

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

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

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

    Before trusting a judge item, open the grading.json evidence for at least one run.

    line 61

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 19 edited versions of this file we could read. “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

skill-eval

Runs headless claude -p agents on a suite of prompts, once per arm, then scores each run.

ArmWhat the agent sees
withplugins/<plugin> from the working tree
withoutno plugin
againstplugins/<plugin> at --against <git-ref>, for old-vs-new comparisons

Every run uses a fresh temp workdir outside the repo with --setting-sources project,local --strict-mcp-config. User plugins, hooks, MCP servers and the global CLAUDE.md are not loaded, so the only non-built-in skill an arm can see is the one under test. Trigger rates are therefore measured without competition from other installed skills.

Run

EVAL=.claude/skills/skill-eval/skill-eval.py
python3 $EVAL run evals/<plugin>/<suite>.json --model sonnet --reps 3 --budget 1
python3 $EVAL run evals/<plugin>/<suite>.json --arms with,against --against HEAD   # did my uncommitted edit help?
python3 $EVAL grade evals/<plugin>/runs/<run-id>                                   # re-grade after editing checks/rubric

run --help lists every flag. Output goes to evals/<plugin>/runs/<suite>-<timestamp>/ (gitignored): summary.md holds the table, and each <case>/<arm>-<rep>/ holds transcript.jsonl, run.json (tool calls, cost, turns, final reply), grading.json and work/ (files after the run).

Each run is a paid model call. Run 1 rep on one --case first, read its transcript, then scale up.

Suite format

evals/<plugin>/<suite>.json. Example: evals/aio-anti-slop/prose.json.

{
  "plugin": "aio-anti-slop", "skill": "aio-anti-slop",
  "permission_mode": "acceptEdits", "allowed_tools": ["Bash"],
  "cases": [{
    "id": "readme-robotic",
    "prompt": "Our README.md sounds robotic ...",
    "files": {"README.md": "seed content"},
    "trigger": true,
    "checks": [{"desc": "install command kept", "file": "README.md", "regex": "bun add tinyq"},
               {"desc": "answers O(log n)", "output": true, "not_regex": "..."}],
    "rubric": ["README.md adds no new factual claims"]
  }]
}
  • trigger: whether the skill should load in plugin arms. Set false for unrelated prompts to measure false triggers. It's detected from Skill / Read …/SKILL.md tool calls in the transcript, not from the agent's own account.
  • checks: regex tests against a workdir file or the final reply (output: true). They're cheap and deterministic, so use them for anything a regex can decide.
  • rubric: judged by a separate blind claude -p call (--judge-model, default sonnet). The judge sees the task, the final reply and the workdir files, but not the arm.
  • permission_mode / allowed_tools: headless runs deny any tool that would prompt. Add allowed_tools when the skill runs scripts, and check the denials column.

Reading results

  • Score is the fraction of trigger, check and rubric items passed, averaged over reps. The number that matters is the difference between arms, not the absolute score.
  • An item that passes in every arm doesn't discriminate. Replace it with one the baseline fails.
  • High variance across reps means you need more reps or a more specific prompt before drawing a conclusion.
  • Before trusting a judge item, open the grading.json evidence for at least one run.

Common mistakes

  • Writing only should-trigger cases. Always include at least one prompt that must not trigger the skill.
  • Seed files that already pass the checks. The without arm has to fail them, or the case measures nothing.
  • Copying the skill's own trigger phrases into the prompt. Write the request the way a user would actually phrase it.

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.