eval

<skill id="eval"> <purpose> Evals are the unit tests of AI development. Define success BEFORE implementation. pass@k measures reliability: did it succeed within k attempts? Capability evals test new abilities. Regression evals prevent breakage. </purpose> <prerequisite> AgentDB read-start has run. Check for existing eval definitions. Understand what behavior you're evaluating before writing evals. </prerequisite> <reference> Skill-specific: skills/eval/reference/eval-research.md </reference>

<core_principles>

1. DEFINE BEFORE CODE: Evals written first force clear thinking about success criteria.
2. CODE GRADERS > MODEL GRADERS: Deterministic checks beat probabilistic judgments.
3. TRACK PASS@K: pass@1 (first attempt), pass@3 (within 3 attempts). Target pass@3 > 90%.
4. REGRESSION BEFORE SHIP: Every change must pass existing evals before merge.
5. FAST EVALS GET RUN: Slow evals get skipped. Keep evaluation fast. </core_principles>

<eval_types>

<!-- Capability Eval: Can it do something new? -->

[CAPABILITY EVAL: semantic-search]
Task: Search markets using natural language
Success Criteria:
  - [ ] Returns relevant results for query
  - [ ] Handles empty query gracefully
  - [ ] Falls back when vector DB unavailable
Expected: Top 5 results match query intent

<!-- Regression Eval: Does existing functionality still work? -->

[REGRESSION EVAL: auth-flow]
Baseline: commit abc123
Tests:
  - login-with-valid-creds: PASS
  - login-with-invalid-creds: PASS
  - session-persistence: PASS
Result: 3/3 passed (unchanged)

</eval_types>

<grader_types>

<!-- Code-Based Grader (preferred) -->

grep -q "export function handleAuth" src/auth.ts && echo "PASS" || echo "FAIL"
npm test -- --testPathPattern="auth" && echo "PASS" || echo "FAIL"
npm run build && echo "PASS" || echo "FAIL"

<!-- Model-Based Grader (open-ended outputs) -->

[MODEL GRADER]
Evaluate: Does this code solve the stated problem?
Criteria: correctness, structure, edge case handling
Score: 1-5
Reasoning: [required]

<!-- Human Grader (security, UX) -->

[HUMAN REVIEW REQUIRED]
Change: Added payment processing
Reason: Security-critical, requires human verification
Risk: HIGH

</grader_types>

<metrics> pass@k: "At least one success in k attempts" - pass@1: First attempt success rate - pass@3: Success within 3 attempts (typical target: > 90%)

pass^k: "All k trials succeed"

• pass^3: 3 consecutive successes
• Use for critical paths (auth, payments) </metrics>

<workflow> 1. DEFINE: Write eval criteria before implementation 2. IMPLEMENT: Code to pass defined evals 3. EVALUATE: Run evals, record pass@k 4. REPORT: Document results, identify failures </workflow>

<eval_report_format>

EVAL REPORT: feature-xyz
========================
Capability Evals:
  create-user:     PASS (pass@1)
  validate-email:  PASS (pass@2)
  hash-password:   PASS (pass@1)
  Overall:         3/3

Regression Evals:
  login-flow:      PASS
  session-mgmt:    PASS
  Overall:         2/2

Metrics:
  pass@1: 67% (2/3)
  pass@3: 100% (3/3)

Status: READY FOR REVIEW

</eval_report_format>

<anti_patterns> <block id="eval_after_code">Writing evals after implementation tests existing bugs, not requirements.</block> <block id="model_grader_overuse">Model-based grading is slow and probabilistic. Prefer code graders.</block> <block id="skip_regression">Every change must pass regression evals. No exceptions.</block> <block id="slow_evals">Evals that take > 30s get skipped. Keep them fast.</block> <block id="no_tracking">Track pass@k over time. Declining reliability is a signal.</block> </anti_patterns>

<on_complete> agentdb write-end '{"skill":"eval","eval_type":"capability|regression","pass_at_1":"<X%>","pass_at_3":"<Y%>","failures":["<list>"]}'

Record eval type, pass rates, and any failures for future reference. </on_complete>

</skill>