Skip to content
Back to skills

Eval Harness

ASecurity

Build a reproducible evaluation harness for a model or agent

  • 3 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 2 views
  • Added September 3, 2026
ai-agentsgo

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 3, 2026

npx -y skills add black141312/ada --skill eval-harness --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Eval Harness?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Eval Harness
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/black141312-eval-harness/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/black141312-eval-harness)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: eval-harness
description: Build a reproducible evaluation harness for a model or agent
category: data-ml
---

# Eval Harness

Use when you need to measure how well a model, prompt, or agent performs against a fixed dataset, and compare versions over time without moving goalposts.

1. Define the task as inputs plus a scoring function; pick metrics that actually reflect the goal (accuracy, F1, pass@k, exact match, rubric score).
2. Build a versioned dataset of cases with expected outputs or grading criteria; keep a small dev set and a frozen test set.
3. Make each case independent and the runner deterministic where possible — fix seeds and temperature, record model/version.
4. Run cases in parallel with isolation, capturing the raw output, score, latency, and cost per case.
5. Aggregate into a scorecard (overall and per-category) and persist results keyed by model/prompt version for diffing.
6. Inspect failures by reading actual transcripts, not just the aggregate; add hard cases back into the dataset.

## Rules
- Freeze the eval set; changing cases and the system in the same run makes results uncomparable.
- Save raw outputs alongside scores so any regression can be inspected after the fact.
- For LLM-as-judge graders, validate the judge against human labels and pin the judge model/prompt.
- Report cost and latency next to quality — a better score that's 10x slower is a real tradeoff.
- Always look at concrete failing cases; aggregate metrics hide systematic errors.

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…