agentleFS
epicsagasepicsagas/epic-harness/skills/eval/SKILL.md

eval

Skill20 starsChanged 2 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub

Quality and performance evaluation with baseline comparison. Sub-modes: correctness, performance, quality, regression. Outputs PASS/WARN/FAIL per dimension. Use for pre-ship evaluation or regression checks.

41 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use docs-ci, docs-interfaces and 10 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.
  • jh941213Skill

    docs-ci

    문서 CI(링크·OpenAPI lint·breaking 게이트·mermaid 검증)나 문서 드리프트 감지(docs.yaml 신선도 검사)를 설치하거나 돌릴 때 사용. 문서 내용 작성은 docs-architecture·docs-interfaces·docs-manuals.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • jh941213Skill

    docs-interfaces

    API·이벤트 인터페이스 문서(OpenAPI·swagger·AsyncAPI 명세, 엔드포인트 레퍼런스, API 구성도·시퀀스, API CHANGELOG)를 만들거나 코드와 맞출 때 사용. 시스템 구성도는 docs-architecture, API 설계 원칙은 api-design-principles.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • open-coder-aiSkill

    policy-init

    Create conformant Chock policy from request. args(request, target_path,

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • TheKREATORSSkill

    instinct-export

    Export instincts from project/global scope to a file

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • TheKREATORSSkill

    instinct-import

    Import instincts from file or URL into project/global scope

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • diego-tobalinaSkill

    build-fix

    Fix build and compilation errors systematically. Run when build fails.

    Also in 6 projects that use this

  • +4 more from jh941213

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

12 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 9 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 32 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 3

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 9

    Very specific

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

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

    CRITICAL: Run HARNESS_DIR=$(epic path) first.

    line 8
  2. Very specific:

    Before /ship creates a PR (automatic if eval.yaml exists)

    line 11
  3. Very specific:

    After /go completes a feature

    line 12
  4. Distinctive:

    When user mentions "regression", "baseline", "eval suite", "quality check"

    line 14
  5. Very specific:

    If $HARNESS_DIR/eval/eval.yaml does not exist, run scaffold:

    line 36
  6. Very specific:

    If eval.yaml has benchmarks: [] and no benchmark files are found in the project:

    line 48
  7. Distinctive:

    Read the project's main source files to understand the domain

    line 78
  8. Very specific:

    Write a benchmark that measures those signals and outputs {"composite": 0.0–1.0, ...}

    line 80
  9. Very specific:

    Use result_type: exit_code for frameworks (criterion, JMH, BenchmarkDotNet) that manage their own output.

    line 90
  10. Very specific:

    If the CLI reports llm_judge: SKIPPED (no LLM available in CLI mode), proceed to Step 2 for LLM-as-judge.

    line 101
  11. Very specific:

    If the quality dimension has llm_judge: true and CLI marked it SKIPPED:

    line 105
  12. Distinctive:

    If no baseline exists, the current run BECOMES the first baseline.

    line 128

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 32 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

Eval — Quality & Regression Gate

CRITICAL: Run HARNESS_DIR=$(epic path) first. Never use .harness/ in the project directory.

When to Trigger

  • Before /ship creates a PR (automatic if eval.yaml exists)
  • After /go completes a feature
  • On explicit /eval command
  • When user mentions "regression", "baseline", "eval suite", "quality check"
  • CI: make eval or epic eval --json

Execution Modes

4 dimensions run in parallel where possible:

  1. eval:correctness — Test pass rate, mutation score, assertion density
  2. eval:performance — Throughput, latency, memory (opt-in)
  3. eval:quality — Lint, code quality, LLM-as-judge
  4. eval:regression — Baseline comparison, score deltas

Process

Step 0: Prerequisites

HARNESS_DIR=$(epic path)

If $HARNESS_DIR/eval/eval.yaml does not exist, run scaffold:

epic eval --init

Read the config:

cat $HARNESS_DIR/eval/eval.yaml

Step 0.5: Scaffold benchmarks (when no benchmark infrastructure exists)

If eval.yaml has benchmarks: [] and no benchmark files are found in the project:

  1. Generate stub files using the CLI:

    epic eval --scaffold

    Supported stacks (auto-detected from project markers):

    StackDetected byGenerated fileOutput format
    RustCargo.tomlbenches/eval_harness.rscriterion (exit code)
    Pythonpyproject.toml / setup.pybenchmarks/eval_runner.pyJSON composite
    TypeScripttsconfig.jsonbenchmarks/eval.tsJSON composite
    Node.jspackage.jsonbenchmarks/eval.mjsJSON composite
    Gogo.modbenchmarks/eval_test.goJSON composite
    Javapom.xml / build.gradlebenchmarks/EvalBenchmark.javaexit code
    Kotlinbuild.gradle.ktsbenchmarks/EvalBenchmark.ktexit code
    RubyGemfilebenchmarks/eval_benchmark.rbJSON composite
    PHPcomposer.jsonbenchmarks/eval_benchmark.phpJSON composite
    C#*.csproj / *.slnBenchmarks/EvalBenchmark.csJSON composite
    SwiftPackage.swiftbenchmarks/EvalBenchmark.swiftJSON composite
    Elixirmix.exsbenchmarks/eval_benchmark.exsJSON composite
    C++CMakeLists.txtbenchmarks/eval_benchmark.cppexit code
  2. Customize the generated file — every file has # TODO / // TODO markers:
    • Replace placeholder logic with calls to your actual domain functions
    • Adjust the composite score weights to reflect your domain priorities
    • For precision/recall benchmarks: wire in your real test set and model
  3. If --scaffold can't generate a useful stub (domain too complex, custom evaluation logic needed), generate a custom benchmark with LLM assistance:
    • Read the project's main source files to understand the domain
    • Identify the 2–3 most critical quality signals (latency, accuracy, throughput, precision/recall)
    • Write a benchmark that measures those signals and outputs {"composite": 0.0–1.0, ...}
    • Save to benchmarks/eval_runner.{ext} matching the project language
  4. Wire into eval.yaml:
    benchmarks:
      - name: eval_runner
        command: python3 benchmarks/eval_runner.py full
        result_type: composite   # parse composite field from JSON stdout
    Use result_type: exit_code for frameworks (criterion, JMH, BenchmarkDotNet) that manage their own output.

Step 1: Run Rust CLI

Execute the structured evaluation via the Rust binary:

epic eval --json

This runs all enabled dimensions and outputs a JSON result. Capture the output.

If the CLI reports llm_judge: SKIPPED (no LLM available in CLI mode), proceed to Step 2 for LLM-as-judge. Otherwise, skip to Step 3.

Step 2: LLM-as-Judge (when llm_judge enabled)

If the quality dimension has llm_judge: true and CLI marked it SKIPPED:

  1. Sample 3–5 changed files from the current branch:
    git diff --name-only $(git merge-base HEAD main)
  2. For each sampled file, evaluate on a 1-10 rubric:
    • Readability (naming, structure, flow)
    • Correctness (logic, edge cases, error handling)
    • DRY (no unjustified duplication)
    • Security (no obvious vulnerabilities)
  3. Average scores across files. Map to 0.0–1.0 scale.
  4. Record results alongside CLI output.

Step 3: Load Baseline

cat $HARNESS_DIR/eval/baselines/latest.json

If no baseline exists, the current run BECOMES the first baseline. Save it:

epic eval --baseline-update

Report: "First baseline established. Future runs will compare against this."

Step 4: Synthesize Report

Combine CLI output + LLM-as-judge results into a single report:

## Eval Report
- Branch: {branch}
- Commit: {commit_short}

### Correctness: [PASS/WARN/FAIL] — score: {score}
- Tests: {passed}/{total} passing ({pass_rate}%)
- Mutation score: {mutation_score}% (if enabled)
- Delta vs baseline: {+/-delta}

### Performance: [PASS/WARN/FAIL] — score: {score} (if enabled)
- Avg latency: {latency}ms (delta: {+/-delta})
- Throughput: {throughput} (delta: {+/-delta})

### Quality: [PASS/WARN/FAIL] — score: {score}
- Lint errors: {count}
- LLM judge: {score}/10 (if enabled)

### Regression: [PASS/FAIL]
| Dimension | Baseline | Current | Delta | Verdict |
|-----------|----------|---------|-------|---------|
| correctness | {prev} | {cur} | {delta} | {pass/fail} |
| quality | {prev} | {cur} | {delta} | {pass/fail} |

### Overall: [PASS/WARN/FAIL] — {overall_score}

Step 5: Act

  • All PASS + no regression: "Eval passed. Run /ship to create a PR."
  • WARN: Show warnings. Ask whether to fix before shipping.
  • FAIL or regression detected: List each failure with fix hint. "Fix with /go, then re-run /eval."

Step 6: Save Results

epic eval --baseline-update  # if user approves this as new baseline

Results auto-saved to $HARNESS_DIR/eval/results/EVAL-{timestamp}.json.


Anti-Rationalization

ExcuseRebuttalWhat to do instead
"Tests pass, no need for eval"Tests pass today but regress tomorrow without baselinesRun eval and establish a baseline
"Performance testing is premature"Latency regressions are invisible until users complainEnable performance dimension, run benchmarks now
"Mutation testing is too slow"Slow mutation catches bugs fast tests missRun on changed modules only (--dimension correctness)
"LLM-as-judge is subjective"Subjective beats absent — fixed rubric + averaging reduces varianceUse the 4-axis rubric, average across 3+ files
"We can add eval later"Later never comes; regressions accumulate silentlyStart with correctness+quality, add dimensions incrementally
"CI will catch regressions"CI only catches build/test failures, not quality driftEval measures what CI misses: mutation score, LLM quality

Evidence Required

  • epic eval --json output captured (all enabled dimensions scored)
  • Baseline comparison performed (or first baseline established)
  • Each dimension has PASS/WARN/FAIL verdict
  • No dimension regressed beyond threshold (or explicit user override)
  • Results saved to $HARNESS_DIR/eval/results/
  • LLM-as-judge scores recorded (if enabled)

Red Flags

  • Reporting PASS without actual epic eval output
  • Skipping regression comparison "because it's the first run" (first run should ESTABLISH baseline)
  • Reporting PASS with 0 test coverage
  • Ignoring mutation score drops >5%
  • Marking eval PASS when any dimension below minimum threshold
  • Running eval on main branch instead of feature branch

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.