AC agent-evaluation
Testing and benchmarking LLM agents including behavioral testing, capability assessment, reliability metrics, and production monitoring—where even top agents achieve less than 50% on real-world benchmarks Use when: agent testing, agent evaluation, benchmark agents, agent reliability, test agent.
As a process C 56/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, failures and branches
The same skill appears in 3 more places: ClawHub, ClawHub, ClawHub
How to improve
- Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
- A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.
Guard findings · 0
✓ No critical or high findings
Files scanned: 2. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- note
frontmatter-keyunknown frontmatter key "source"
Process rating: all ten parameters 56/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (agent-evaluation) differs from the folder (agent-evaluation1)
- 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 7 steps
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 675 tokens
- 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.
Quality signals
- +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 296: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 14 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 7 items
- +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 83.