Agent skill

agentic-eval

Patterns and techniques for evaluating and improving AI agent outputs. Use this skill when: - Implementing self-critique and reflection loops - Building evaluator-optimizer pipelines for quality-critical generation - Creating test-driven code refinement workflows - Designing rubric-based or LLM-as-judge evaluation systems - Adding iterative improvement to agent outputs (code, reports, analysis) - Measuring and improving agent response quality

Stars 1,878
Forks 294

Install this agent skill to your Project

npx add-skill https://github.com/LeoYeAI/openclaw-master-skills/tree/main/skills/agentic-eval

SKILL.md

Agentic Evaluation Patterns

Patterns for self-improvement through iterative evaluation and refinement.

Overview

Evaluation patterns enable agents to assess and improve their own outputs, moving beyond single-shot generation to iterative refinement loops.

Generate → Evaluate → Critique → Refine → Output
    ↑                              │
    └──────────────────────────────┘

When to Use

  • Quality-critical generation: Code, reports, analysis requiring high accuracy
  • Tasks with clear evaluation criteria: Defined success metrics exist
  • Content requiring specific standards: Style guides, compliance, formatting

Pattern 1: Basic Reflection

Agent evaluates and improves its own output through self-critique.

python
def reflect_and_refine(task: str, criteria: list[str], max_iterations: int = 3) -> str:
    """Generate with reflection loop."""
    output = llm(f"Complete this task:\n{task}")
    
    for i in range(max_iterations):
        # Self-critique
        critique = llm(f"""
        Evaluate this output against criteria: {criteria}
        Output: {output}
        Rate each: PASS/FAIL with feedback as JSON.
        """)
        
        critique_data = json.loads(critique)
        all_pass = all(c["status"] == "PASS" for c in critique_data.values())
        if all_pass:
            return output
        
        # Refine based on critique
        failed = {k: v["feedback"] for k, v in critique_data.items() if v["status"] == "FAIL"}
        output = llm(f"Improve to address: {failed}\nOriginal: {output}")
    
    return output

Key insight: Use structured JSON output for reliable parsing of critique results.


Pattern 2: Evaluator-Optimizer

Separate generation and evaluation into distinct components for clearer responsibilities.

python
class EvaluatorOptimizer:
    def __init__(self, score_threshold: float = 0.8):
        self.score_threshold = score_threshold
    
    def generate(self, task: str) -> str:
        return llm(f"Complete: {task}")
    
    def evaluate(self, output: str, task: str) -> dict:
        return json.loads(llm(f"""
        Evaluate output for task: {task}
        Output: {output}
        Return JSON: {{"overall_score": 0-1, "dimensions": {{"accuracy": ..., "clarity": ...}}}}
        """))
    
    def optimize(self, output: str, feedback: dict) -> str:
        return llm(f"Improve based on feedback: {feedback}\nOutput: {output}")
    
    def run(self, task: str, max_iterations: int = 3) -> str:
        output = self.generate(task)
        for _ in range(max_iterations):
            evaluation = self.evaluate(output, task)
            if evaluation["overall_score"] >= self.score_threshold:
                break
            output = self.optimize(output, evaluation)
        return output

Pattern 3: Code-Specific Reflection

Test-driven refinement loop for code generation.

python
class CodeReflector:
    def reflect_and_fix(self, spec: str, max_iterations: int = 3) -> str:
        code = llm(f"Write Python code for: {spec}")
        tests = llm(f"Generate pytest tests for: {spec}\nCode: {code}")
        
        for _ in range(max_iterations):
            result = run_tests(code, tests)
            if result["success"]:
                return code
            code = llm(f"Fix error: {result['error']}\nCode: {code}")
        return code

Evaluation Strategies

Outcome-Based

Evaluate whether output achieves the expected result.

python
def evaluate_outcome(task: str, output: str, expected: str) -> str:
    return llm(f"Does output achieve expected outcome? Task: {task}, Expected: {expected}, Output: {output}")

LLM-as-Judge

Use LLM to compare and rank outputs.

python
def llm_judge(output_a: str, output_b: str, criteria: str) -> str:
    return llm(f"Compare outputs A and B for {criteria}. Which is better and why?")

Rubric-Based

Score outputs against weighted dimensions.

python
RUBRIC = {
    "accuracy": {"weight": 0.4},
    "clarity": {"weight": 0.3},
    "completeness": {"weight": 0.3}
}

def evaluate_with_rubric(output: str, rubric: dict) -> float:
    scores = json.loads(llm(f"Rate 1-5 for each dimension: {list(rubric.keys())}\nOutput: {output}"))
    return sum(scores[d] * rubric[d]["weight"] for d in rubric) / 5

Best Practices

Practice Rationale
Clear criteria Define specific, measurable evaluation criteria upfront
Iteration limits Set max iterations (3-5) to prevent infinite loops
Convergence check Stop if output score isn't improving between iterations
Log history Keep full trajectory for debugging and analysis
Structured output Use JSON for reliable parsing of evaluation results

Quick Start Checklist

markdown
## Evaluation Implementation Checklist

### Setup
- [ ] Define evaluation criteria/rubric
- [ ] Set score threshold for "good enough"
- [ ] Configure max iterations (default: 3)

### Implementation
- [ ] Implement generate() function
- [ ] Implement evaluate() function with structured output
- [ ] Implement optimize() function
- [ ] Wire up the refinement loop

### Safety
- [ ] Add convergence detection
- [ ] Log all iterations for debugging
- [ ] Handle evaluation parse failures gracefully

Expand your agent's capabilities with these related and highly-rated skills.

LeoYeAI/openclaw-master-skills

audit-website

Audit websites for SEO, performance, security, technical, content, and 15 other issue cateories with 230+ rules using the squirrelscan CLI. Returns LLM-optimized reports with health scores, broken links, meta tag analysis, and actionable recommendations. Use to discover and asses website or webapp issues and health.

1,878 294
Explore
LeoYeAI/openclaw-master-skills

firecrawl

Web search and scraping via Firecrawl API. Use when you need to search the web, scrape websites (including JS-heavy pages), crawl entire sites, or extract structured data from web pages. Requires FIRECRAWL_API_KEY environment variable.

1,878 294
Explore
LeoYeAI/openclaw-master-skills

computer-use

Full desktop computer use for headless Linux servers. Xvfb + XFCE virtual desktop with xdotool automation. 17 actions (click, type, scroll, screenshot, drag, etc). Unlike OpenClaw's browser tool, operates at the X11 level so websites cannot detect automation. Includes VNC for live viewing.

1,878 294
Explore
LeoYeAI/openclaw-master-skills

social-media-analyzer

Social media campaign analysis and performance tracking. Calculates engagement rates, ROI, and benchmarks across platforms. Use for analyzing social media performance, calculating engagement rate, measuring campaign ROI, comparing platform metrics, or benchmarking against industry standards.

1,878 294
Explore
LeoYeAI/openclaw-master-skills

business-growth-skills

4 production-ready business and growth skills: customer success manager with health scoring and churn prediction, sales engineer with RFP analysis, revenue operations with pipeline and GTM metrics, and contract & proposal writer. Python tools included (all stdlib-only). Works with Claude Code, Codex CLI, and OpenClaw.

1,878 294
Explore
LeoYeAI/openclaw-master-skills

contract-and-proposal-writer

Contract & Proposal Writer

1,878 294
Explore

Didn't find tool you were looking for?

Be as detailed as possible for better results