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 agentmods add skills/furkangonel/cowrangler/model-evaluationnpx skills add furkangonel/cowrangler --skill model-evaluationgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/furkangonel/cowranglerWrote 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/furkangonel/cowrangler/model-evaluation)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/furkangonel/cowrangler/model-evaluation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/furkangonel/cowrangler/model-evaluation.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00018 | $0.03154 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.01577 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00631 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00315 |
Grade A, and why
model-evaluation 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 6d 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 — 352 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Model Evaluation SOP
Evaluate ML models systematically: choose the right metrics, run benchmarks, analyze errors, and produce reproducible evaluation reports.
When to Use
- User wants to evaluate a model's performance on a dataset
- User wants to compare two or more models objectively
- User wants to understand where a model fails (error analysis)
- User wants to check for bias across data slices
- User wants a structured evaluation report
Part 1 — Metric Selection by Task Type
Classification
from sklearn.metrics import (
classification_report, confusion_matrix,
roc_auc_score, average_precision_score,
f1_score, precision_score, recall_score, accuracy_score,
)
import numpy as np
def evaluate_classifier(y_true, y_pred, y_prob=None, labels=None):
"""Full classification evaluation suite."""
print("=== Classification Report ===")
print(classification_report(y_true, y_pred, target_names=labels))
print("=== Confusion Matrix ===")
cm = confusion_matrix(y_true, y_pred)
print(cm)
if y_prob is not None:
# Binary
if y_prob.ndim == 1 or y_prob.shape[1] == 2:
prob = y_prob if y_prob.ndim == 1 else y_prob[:, 1]
print(f"\nROC-AUC: {roc_auc_score(y_true, prob):.4f}")
print(f"Avg Precision: {average_precision_score(y_true, prob):.4f}")
else:
# Multiclass OvR
print(f"\nROC-AUC (macro): {roc_auc_score(y_true, y_prob, multi_class='ovr', average='macro'):.4f}")
print(f"\nAccuracy: {accuracy_score(y_true, y_pred):.4f}")
print(f"F1 (macro): {f1_score(y_true, y_pred, average='macro'):.4f}")
print(f"F1 (weighted): {f1_score(y_true, y_pred, average='weighted'):.4f}")
Metric guidance:
- Balanced dataset: Accuracy is acceptable; F1 macro provides class-level fairness view.
- Imbalanced dataset: Use F1-weighted, ROC-AUC, or PR-AUC (Average Precision). Accuracy misleads.
- High recall priority (medical, fraud detection): Maximize recall; accept lower precision.
- High precision priority (spam filter, legal): Maximize precision.
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 352 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A 66beee264eaf
model-evaluation is a skill published in the GitHub repository furkangonel/cowrangler (2 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 3,154 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
hugging-face-evaluation
Add and manage evaluation results in Hugging Face model cards. Supports extracting eval tables from README content, importing scores from Artificial Analysis API, and running custom model evaluations with vLLM/lighteval. Works with the model-index metadata format.
scikit-learn
Machine learning in Python with scikit-learn. Use when working with supervised learning (classification, regression), unsupervised learning (clustering, dimensionality reduction), model evaluation, hyperparameter tuning, preprocessing, or building ML pipelines. Provides comprehensive reference documentation for…
evaluating-code-models
Evaluates code generation models across HumanEval, MBPP, MultiPL-E, and 15+ benchmarks with pass@k metrics. Use when benchmarking code models, comparing coding abilities, testing multi-language support, or measuring code generation quality. Industry standard from BigCode Project used by HuggingFace leaderboards.
Evaluation
Frames model, prompt, and system evaluation as a reproducible experiment with baselines, datasets, and explicit metrics.
llm-evaluator
Evaluate LLM outputs systematically using LLM-as-judge, human evaluation frameworks, and regression testing. Use when assessing model quality, comparing models, or preventing quality regression.
evaluating-code-models
Evaluates code generation models across HumanEval, MBPP, MultiPL-E, and 15+ benchmarks with pass@k metrics. Use when benchmarking code models, comparing coding abilities, testing multi-language support, or measuring code generation quality. Industry standard from BigCode Project used by HuggingFace leaderboards.