eval

eval is a command for coding agents from affaan-m/ECC. It costs 5 tokens per session (445 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A command that checks an implementation against defined acceptance criteria, meaning the conditions it must satisfy.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to evaluate feature completion, bug fixes, performance, or several quality dimensions using binary, numeric, or rubric-based grading.
Why use it?
It replaces a general opinion about quality with test evidence, scores, and a clear pass-or-fail result.

Command

Part of the ecc plugin — 70 skills, 56 commands, 68 agents, 1 MCP server shipped together

About the project

ECC is a toolkit that organizes and improves how coding agents work through skills, memory, security checks, research practices, and related extensions. It is for developers using agents such as Claude Code, Codex, OpenCode, and Cursor.

affaan-m/ECC · 246,988 stars · on GitHub

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 commands/affaan-m/ecc/eval
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/affaan-m/ECC

Or install ecc, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 70 skills, 56 commands, 68 agents, 1 MCP server.

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 eval

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/affaan-m/ecc/eval.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/commands/affaan-m/ecc/eval)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/affaan-m/ecc/eval"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/affaan-m/ecc/eval.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 5 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 445 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
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 $0.00005 $0.00445
Opus 5 $0.00003 $0.00222
Sonnet 5 $0.00001 $0.00089
Haiku 4.5 $0.00001 $0.00044

Measured today against content hash b090a6524c94, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

eval 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 today.

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

Copies of this mod

8 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:

  • eval — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
  • eval — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
  • eval — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
  • eval — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
  • eval — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
  • eval — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
  • eval — 95% identical, 2 lines differ
  • eval — 95% identical, 2 lines differ
.opencode/commands/eval.md · 89 lines

What it actually says

Eval Command

Evaluate implementation against acceptance criteria: $ARGUMENTS

Your Task

Run structured evaluation to verify the implementation meets requirements.

Evaluation Framework

Grader Types

  1. Binary Grader - Pass/Fail

    • Does it work? Yes/No
    • Good for: feature completion, bug fixes
  2. Scalar Grader - Score 0-100

    • How well does it work?
    • Good for: performance, quality metrics
  3. Rubric Grader - Category scores

    • Multiple dimensions evaluated
    • Good for: comprehensive review

Evaluation Process

Step 1: Define Criteria

Acceptance Criteria:
1. [Criterion 1] - [weight]
2. [Criterion 2] - [weight]
3. [Criterion 3] - [weight]

Step 2: Run Tests

For each criterion:

  • Execute relevant test
  • Collect evidence
  • Score result

Step 3: Calculate Score

Final Score = Σ (criterion_score × weight) / total_weight

Step 4: Report

Evaluation Report

Overall: [PASS/FAIL] (Score: X/100)

Criterion Breakdown

Criterion Score Weight Weighted
[Criterion 1] X/10 30% X
[Criterion 2] X/10 40% X
[Criterion 3] X/10 30% X

Evidence

Criterion 1: [Name]

  • Test: [what was tested]
  • Result: [outcome]
  • Evidence: [screenshot, log, output]

Recommendations

[If not passing, what needs to change]

Pass@K Metrics

For non-deterministic evaluations:

  • Run K times
  • Calculate pass rate
  • Report: "Pass@K = X/K"

TIP: Use eval for acceptance testing before marking features complete.

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. today First seen · 89 lines · 5 tokens per session scan A b090a6524c94

Subscribe to this mod's changes

eval is a command published in the GitHub repository affaan-m/ECC (246,988 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 5 tokens to every session and 445 once invoked, about $0.0000 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 2026-09-03.