agent-eval-workflow

agent-eval-workflow is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from GoogleCloudPlatform/professional-services. It costs 123 tokens per session (2,732 once invoked), scanned A, original, Apache-2.0.

A workflow for evaluating an AI agent from start to finish. It covers setting up tests, defining measurable criteria, checking evaluation configurations, reading results, and repeating improvements.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to design agent evaluations, measure real behavior, audit evaluation settings, interpret results, and run improvement cycles.
Why use it?
It replaces vague judgments with testable claims and evidence about what an agent does correctly or incorrectly.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Written for no agent in particular: nothing here depends on one.

Good fit Use it to design agent evaluations, measure real behavior, audit evaluation settings, interpret results, and run improvement cycles.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/googlecloudplatform/professional-services/agent-eval-workflow
About the project

Google Cloud Professional Services is a repository of example solutions and tools for building systems with Google Cloud products. Teams can use them as references or adapt them for workloads involving services such as GKE, BigQuery, Dataflow, and machine learning APIs. The catalogue entries are skills related to this repository.

GoogleCloudPlatform/professional-services · 3,082 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.

Any agent
npx skills add GoogleCloudPlatform/professional-services --skill agent-eval-workflow
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/professional-services

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

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 agent-eval-workflow

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/googlecloudplatform/professional-services/agent-eval-workflow/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/googlecloudplatform/professional-services/agent-eval-workflow)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/googlecloudplatform/professional-services/agent-eval-workflow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/googlecloudplatform/professional-services/agent-eval-workflow/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for agent-eval-workflow

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/googlecloudplatform/professional-services/agent-eval-workflow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/googlecloudplatform/professional-services/agent-eval-workflow.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 123 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 2,732 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. Third-party audits
  • NVIDIA SkillSpector pass 7 Sept 2026
How audits are shown
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 $0.00123 $0.02732
Opus 5.5 $0.00049 $0.01093
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00025 $0.00546
Haiku 4.5 $0.00012 $0.00273

Measured 1mo ago against content hash 1dd4c8053fdd, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

agent-eval-workflow 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 1mo 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.

tools/agent-eval/skills/agent-eval-workflow/SKILL.md · 266 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 266 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Agent evaluation: the process

Commands change. The process does not. This skill is about how to evaluate an agent well — the reasoning that stays true whether you drive it with agent-eval, agents-cli eval, or whatever replaces them.

The loop: Hypothesize. Test. Validate.

State a falsifiable claim about the agent, write metrics that could prove you wrong, run them, and let the results — not your intuition — decide what to fix.


1. Start from a hypothesis, not from "add some metrics"

A metric exists to settle an argument. Before generating anything, answer:

  • What do I believe this agent gets wrong?
  • What observable evidence would prove that?
  • What would prove me wrong?

Read the agent's own instructions and tool code first. Stated rules are testable claims — "always confirm before deleting", "never approve above 10%", "always cite a source". Those sentences convert directly into criteria.

When a generator asks what to focus on, give it the hypothesis in plain language naming real tools and thresholds. Vague guidance produces vague rubrics.

Good: "The agent must never call approve_discount above 10%; it should route larger requests to sync_ask_for_approval instead of being rejected and retrying."

Weak: "Test discount handling."

Prefer binary rubrics (0/1). LLM judges have poor inter-rater reliability on 1–5 scales. Several sharp binary metrics beat one fuzzy graded one, and the pass rate across a dataset gives you a continuous score with better statistics.


2. Make the agent measurable before measuring harder

A judge reading prose is fuzzy. A state variable written by the tool itself is deterministic. If a tool already makes a decision, record it:

def approve_discount(discount_type: str, value: float, reason: str,
                     tool_context: ToolContext) -> dict:
    if value > MAX_DISCOUNT_RATE:
        tool_context.state["discount_status"] = "rejected"   # hard evidence
        return {"status": "rejected", "message": "discount too large."}
    tool_context.state["discount_status"] = "approved"
    return {"status": "ok"}

Read the full file on GitHub · 266 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. 1mo ago First seen · 266 lines · 123 tokens per session scan A 1dd4c8053fdd

Subscribe to this mod's changes

agent-eval-workflow is a skill published in the GitHub repository GoogleCloudPlatform/professional-services (3,082 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 123 tokens to every session and 2,732 once invoked, about $0.0005 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 skills, from other repositories

securing-kubernetes-on-cloud

This skill covers hardening managed Kubernetes clusters on EKS, AKS, and GKE by implementing Pod Security Standards, network policies, workload identity, RBAC scoping, image admission controls, and runtime security monitoring. It addresses cloud-specific security features including IRSA for EKS, Workload Identity for…

xalgorix/xalgorix · 80 tokens

implementing-gcp-binary-authorization

Implement GCP Binary Authorization to enforce deploy-time security controls that ensure only trusted, attested container images are deployed to Google Kubernetes Engine and Cloud Run.

xalgorix/xalgorix · 39 tokens

vertex-deploy

Skill "vertex-deploy" from GoogleCloudPlatform/vertex-ai-samples, covering vertex ai model garden deploy skill, 1. prerequisites, 2. discovering deployable models, 3. deploying a model and example: deploying gemma 3.

GoogleCloudPlatform/vertex-ai-samples · 0 tokens

vertex-inference

Skill "vertex-inference" from GoogleCloudPlatform/vertex-ai-samples, covering vertex ai genai inference skill, 1. authentication (critical), 2. gemini models, choosing the right sdk and installation.

GoogleCloudPlatform/vertex-ai-samples · 0 tokens

genai-sdk

Guides the usage of Gemini API on Google Cloud Vertex AI with the Gen AI SDK. Use when the user asks about using Gemini in an enterprise environment or explicitly mentions Vertex AI. Covers SDK usage (Python, JS/TS, Go, Java, C#), capabilities like Live API, tools, multimedia generation, caching, and batch prediction.

GoogleCloudPlatform/vertex-ai-samples · 73 tokens

quality-flywheel

Evaluate and improve GenAI models and agents using the Google GenAI Evaluation SDK. Creates eval datasets (from session traces or synthetic generation), selects and configures metrics (RubricMetric, LLMMetric, CodeExecutionMetric), executes evals via client.evals.evaluate(), and analyzes results to suggest concrete…

GoogleCloudPlatform/vertex-ai-samples · 128 tokens