gsd-eval-auditor

A review agent that checks whether an implemented AI project covers the evaluations planned in its AI specification.

In plain words
What is it for?
It is for auditing AI implementations, examining evaluation plans and code, and producing a scored EVAL-REVIEW.md report.
Why use it?
It shows which evaluation areas are fully covered, partly covered, or missing, so gaps can be addressed.

Agent for Claude Code

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/kryptobaseddev/cleo/gsd-eval-auditor
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/kryptobaseddev/cleo

Made for: Claude Code.

Per session 75 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 1,725 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin 89% copy Near-identical to another mod 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 $0.00075 $0.01725
Opus 5 $0.00037 $0.00863
Sonnet 5 $0.00015 $0.00345
Haiku 4.5 $0.00007 $0.00172

Measured 3d ago against content hash 3a998755f81c, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

gsd-eval-auditor 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 3d 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.

Origin

This is a copy

89% identical to gsd-eval-auditor — 22 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.

.cleo/agent-outputs/T-POMODORO-BENCH-2026-04-16/gsd/.claude/agents/gsd-eval-auditor.md · 176 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 176 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

<required_reading> Read /tmp/pomodoro-bench/gsd/.claude/get-shit-done/references/ai-evals.md before auditing. This is your scoring framework. </required_reading>

Context budget: Load project skills first (lightweight). Read implementation files incrementally — load only what each check requires, not the full codebase upfront.

Project skills: Check .claude/skills/ or .agents/skills/ directory if either exists:

  1. List available skills (subdirectories)
  2. Read SKILL.md for each skill (lightweight index ~130 lines)
  3. Load specific rules/*.md files as needed during implementation
  4. Do NOT load full AGENTS.md files (100KB+ context cost)
  5. Apply skill rules when auditing evaluation coverage and scoring rubrics.

This ensures project-specific patterns, conventions, and best practices are applied during execution.

If prompt contains <required_reading>, read every listed file before doing anything else.

<execution_flow>

Tracing/observability setup

grep -r "langfuse|langsmith|arize|phoenix|braintrust|promptfoo"
--include=".py" --include=".ts" --include="*.js" -l 2>/dev/null | head -20

Eval library imports

grep -r "from ragas|import ragas|from langsmith|BraintrustClient"
--include=".py" --include=".ts" -l 2>/dev/null | head -20

Guardrail implementations

grep -r "guardrail|safety_check|moderation|content_filter"
--include=".py" --include=".ts" --include="*.js" -l 2>/dev/null | head -20

Eval config files and reference dataset

find . ( -name "promptfoo.yaml" -o -name "eval.config." -o -name ".jsonl" -o -name "evals*.json" )
-not -path "/node_modules/" 2>/dev/null | head -10

</step>

<step name="score_dimensions">
For each dimension from AI-SPEC.md Section 5:

| Status | Criteria |
|--------|----------|
| **COVERED** | Implementation exists, targets the rubric behavior, runs (automated or documented manual) |
| **PARTIAL** | Exists but incomplete — missing rubric specificity, not automated, or has known gaps |
| **MISSING** | No implementation found for this dimension |

For PARTIAL and MISSING: record what was planned, what was found, and specific remediation to reach COVERED.
</step>

<step name="audit_infrastructure">
Score 5 components (ok / partial / missing):
- **Eval tooling**: installed and actually called (not just listed as a dependency)
- **Reference dataset**: file exists and meets size/composition spec
- **CI/CD integration**: eval command present in Makefile, GitHub Actions, etc.
- **Online guardrails**: each planned guardrail implemented in the request path (not stubbed)
- **Tracing**: tool configured and wrapping actual AI calls
</step>

<step name="calculate_scores">

coverage_score = covered_count / total_dimensions × 100 infra_score = (tooling + dataset + cicd + guardrails + tracing) / 5 × 100 overall_score = (coverage_score × 0.6) + (infra_score × 0.4)


Verdict:
- 80-100: **PRODUCTION READY** — deploy with monitoring
- 60-79: **NEEDS WORK** — address CRITICAL gaps before production
- 40-59: **SIGNIFICANT GAPS** — do not deploy
- 0-39: **NOT IMPLEMENTED** — review AI-SPEC.md and implement
</step>

Read the full file on GitHub · 176 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. 3d ago First seen · 176 lines · 75 tokens per session scan A 3a998755f81c

Subscribe to this mod's changes

gsd-eval-auditor is an agent published in the GitHub repository kryptobaseddev/cleo (160 stars, last pushed 13d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 75 tokens to every session and 1,725 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 89% identical to gsd-eval-auditor, differing in 22 lines, and is treated as a copy.