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.
npx skills add cnfeat/top-pm-skills --skill ai-evalsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cnfeat/top-pm-skillsWrote 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.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/cnfeat/top-pm-skills/ai-evals)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/cnfeat/top-pm-skills/ai-evals"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/cnfeat/top-pm-skills/ai-evals/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/cnfeat/top-pm-skills/ai-evals"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/cnfeat/top-pm-skills/ai-evals.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>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.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00045 | $0.00557 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00279 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00111 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00056 |
Grade A, and why
ai-evals 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 11d 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 54 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
AI Evals
Help the user create systematic evaluations for AI products using insights from AI practitioners.
How to Help
When the user asks for help with AI evals:
- Understand what they're evaluating - Ask what AI feature or model they're testing and what "good" looks like
- Help design the eval approach - Suggest rubrics, test cases, and measurement methods
- Guide implementation - Help them think through edge cases, scoring criteria, and iteration cycles
- Connect to product requirements - Ensure evals align with actual user needs, not just technical metrics
Core Principles
Evals are the new PRD
Brendan Foody: "If the model is the product, then the eval is the product requirement document." Evals define what success looks like in AI products—they're not optional quality checks, they're core specifications.
Evals are a core product skill
Hamel Husain & Shreya Shankar: "Both the chief product officers of Anthropic and OpenAI shared that evals are becoming the most important new skill for product builders." This isn't just for ML engineers—product people need to master this.
The workflow matters
Building good evals involves error analysis, open coding (writing down what's wrong), clustering failure patterns, and creating rubrics. It's a systematic process, not a one-time test.
Questions to Help Users
- "What does 'good' look like for this AI output?"
- "What are the most common failure modes you've seen?"
- "How will you know if the model got better or worse?"
- "Are you measuring what users actually care about?"
- "Have you manually reviewed enough outputs to understand failure patterns?"
Common Mistakes to Flag
- Skipping manual review - You can't write good evals without first understanding failure patterns through manual trace analysis
- Using vague criteria - "The output should be good" isn't an eval; you need specific, measurable criteria
- LLM-as-judge without validation - If using an LLM to judge, you must validate that judge against human experts
- Likert scales over binary - Force Pass/Fail decisions; 1-5 scales produce meaningless averages
What ships with it
1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 54 lines · 45 tokens per session scan A 43c2fb5b0cdf
ai-evals is a skill published in the GitHub repository cnfeat/top-pm-skills (48 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 45 tokens to every session and 557 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.
Other skills, from other repositories
cli-eval
Create and run evaluation suites, watch live benchmark progress, view scorecards, compare model performance, and integrate eval runs with CI workflows from the CLI.
model-merging
Merge multiple fine-tuned models using mergekit to combine capabilities without retraining. Use when creating specialized models by blending domain-specific expertise (math + coding + chat), improving performance beyond single models, or experimenting rapidly with model variants. Covers SLERP, TIES-Merging, DARE, Task…
darwinian-evolver
Evolve prompts/regex/SQL/code with Imbue's evolution loop.
validate
Validate Semantica pipelines, extraction quality, graph schemas, and ontology consistency. Returns structured error/warning checklists. Uses PipelineValidator, PipelineBuilder.validatepipeline(), GraphValidator, and OntologyValidator. Sub-commands: pipeline, step, dependencies, extraction, graph, ontology, performance.
launching-evals
Run, monitor, analyze, and debug LLM evaluations via nemo-evaluator-launcher. Covers running evaluations, checking status and live progress, debugging failed runs, exporting artifacts and logs, and analyzing results. ALWAYS triggers on mentions of running evaluations, checking progress, debugging failed evals…
nemo-automodel-recipe-development
Create and modify NeMo AutoModel training and evaluation recipes, including YAML structure, builders, and execution flow.