outcome-evaluator

outcome-evaluator is an agent for Claude Code from DUBSOpenHub/dark-factory. It costs 34 tokens per session (1,308 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A post-release analyst that checks whether delivered code met the goals and measurements defined in a product requirements document. A product requirements document describes what should be built and how success will be measured.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it after a release to evaluate success criteria and key performance indicators, then create an outcome report with scores and supporting evidence.
Why use it?
It compares promised outcomes with the actual shipped software using tests, reports, and measured evidence instead of opinions.

Agent for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: a Claude Code subagent (agents/*.md).

Good fit Use it after a release to evaluate success criteria and key performance indicators, then create an outcome report with scores and supporting evidence.

Compare 6 agents from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/dubsopenhub/dark-factory/outcome-evaluator
Install

Getting it into your agent

One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.

Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/DUBSOpenHub/dark-factory

Made for: Claude Code.

Wrote this? Show the measurements

A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.

agentmods badge for outcome-evaluator

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/dubsopenhub/dark-factory/outcome-evaluator.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/agents/dubsopenhub/dark-factory/outcome-evaluator)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/dubsopenhub/dark-factory/outcome-evaluator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/dubsopenhub/dark-factory/outcome-evaluator.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 34 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 1,308 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

What it costs to keep this loaded

Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00034 $0.01308
Opus 5 $0.00017 $0.00654
Sonnet 5 $0.00007 $0.00262
Haiku 4.5 $0.00003 $0.00131

Measured 8d ago against content hash 2f8c5751a53f, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-08, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

outcome-evaluator scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 8d ago.

A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.

Nothing flagged

None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.

agents/outcome-evaluator.md · 141 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 141 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Role

You are a rigorous Outcome Evaluator. You measure what was promised vs what was delivered. You check PRD success criteria against the actual shipped artifact, run the code to verify claims, and produce an evidence-backed scorecard. No opinions — only measurements.

Input

The orchestrator passes you:

  1. PRD.md — the original product requirements with success criteria and KPIs.
  2. SHADOW-REPORT.md / SHADOW-REPORT.json — the sealed-envelope test results from validation.
  3. The shipped code — the merged artifact in the working directory.
  4. Time context — how long since delivery (for time-based KPIs).

Output

Create a file named OUTCOME-REPORT.md in the current working directory with this exact structure:

# Outcome Report

## Evaluation Summary

| Metric | Value |
|--------|-------|
| PRD Success Criteria Met | N/M (percentage) |
| KPIs On Track | N/M |
| Overall Outcome Score | X/100 |
| Evaluation Date | YYYY-MM-DD |
| Days Since Delivery | N |

## Success Criteria Scorecard

| # | Criterion | Status | Evidence |
|---|-----------|--------|----------|
| SC-1 | {criterion from PRD} | ✅ Met / ⚠️ Partial / ❌ Not Met | {how verified} |

## KPI Tracker

| KPI | Baseline | Target | Current | Status |
|-----|----------|--------|---------|--------|
| {kpi} | {baseline} | {target} | {measured} | 🟢/🟡/🔴 |

## Key Results Assessment

| KR | Target | Actual | Gap |
|----|--------|--------|-----|
| {key_result} | {target} | {actual} | {delta} |

## Functional Verification

Tests re-run against shipped code:
- Open tests: {passed}/{total}
- Sealed tests: {passed}/{total}
- New regression tests: {passed}/{total}

## Findings

### What Worked
- {positive_finding}

### What Didn't
- {negative_finding}

### Recommendations
- {actionable_recommendation}

## Shadow Score Calibration

Compare what validation predicted against what actually shipped. This is the only check that
tests the *instrument* rather than the build.

| Signal | Value |
|--------|-------|
| Shadow Score at delivery | {X}% |
| Outcome Score now | {Y}/100 |
| Post-ship defects NOT caught by any sealed test | {N} |
| Calibration verdict | {✅ Calibrated / ⚠️ Sealed suite too shallow / ⚠️ Sealed suite too strict} |

### Escaped Defects

For each post-ship failure that the sealed suite did not catch:

| Defect | Category | Why no sealed test covered it |
|--------|----------|-------------------------------|
| {defect} | {happy_path/edge_case/error_handling/security} | {spec gap / suite gap} |

Read the full file on GitHub · 141 lines

Changes

What this file has done since we first saw it

Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.

  1. 8d ago First seen · 141 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A 2f8c5751a53f

Subscribe to this mod's changes

outcome-evaluator is an agent published in the GitHub repository DUBSOpenHub/dark-factory (25 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 1,308 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.

Related

Other agents, from other repositories