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/hajekim/agentic-design-patterns-extension/evaluationnpx skills add hajekim/agentic-design-patterns-extension --skill evaluationgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/hajekim/agentic-design-patterns-extensionWrote 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/hajekim/agentic-design-patterns-extension/evaluation)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/hajekim/agentic-design-patterns-extension/evaluation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hajekim/agentic-design-patterns-extension/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 | $0.00387 | $0.04406 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00193 | $0.02203 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00077 | $0.00881 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00039 | $0.00441 |
Grade A, and why
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 4d 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to evaluation — 3 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 459 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Evaluation & Monitoring Pattern
Overview
The Evaluation & Monitoring Pattern establishes systematic methods for measuring agent quality, detecting degradation, and maintaining performance standards over time. Without evaluation, you cannot know if your agent is actually working correctly — and without monitoring, you won't know when it stops working.
Core Principle: You can't improve what you don't measure — define quality metrics before deployment, not after problems surface.
When This Skill Applies
Activate this pattern when:
- An agent is being deployed to production and performance must be tracked
- Agent behavior needs to be compared before and after changes
- Hallucination rates, accuracy, or helpfulness must be measured quantitatively
- A/B testing of different agent configurations is needed
- Regulatory compliance requires audit trails and performance documentation
- You need to detect agent drift or degradation over time
Rule of thumb: Every production agent needs evaluation and monitoring — this isn't optional, it's how you know the agent is doing its job.
Evaluation Dimensions
| Dimension | What It Measures | Evaluation Method |
|---|---|---|
| Correctness | Is the answer right? | Ground truth comparison, expert review |
| Faithfulness | Are claims grounded in context? | RAG evaluation, hallucination detection |
| Relevance | Does response address the question? | LLM-as-judge, human ratings |
| Completeness | Are all aspects covered? | Checklist evaluation |
| Safety | Is output appropriate/harmless? | Safety classifier, policy compliance |
| Latency | How fast does the agent respond? | P50/P95/P99 timing metrics |
| Cost | What is the per-query cost? | Token counting, API cost tracking |
DEFINE → PLAN → ACTION Workflow
DEFINE
Establish evaluation requirements:
- What does "good" mean for this specific agent? (Domain-specific criteria)
- What ground truth data is available? (Golden datasets, human labels)
- What metrics matter most? (Accuracy, safety, cost, latency — prioritize)
- How frequently should the agent be evaluated? (Continuous vs. periodic)
- What triggers a production alert? (Threshold-based, anomaly-based)
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 459 lines · 387 tokens per session scan A fe04323d1fa3
evaluation is a skill published in the GitHub repository hajekim/agentic-design-patterns-extension (1 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 387 tokens to every session and 4,406 once invoked, about $0.0019 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to evaluation, differing in 3 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
prompt engineering
Use this skill when asked to create, refine, analyze, or optimize prompts for Large Language Models (LLMs). This skill ensures adherence to prompt engineering best practices and enforces a rigorous design workflow.
redteam
Expertise in offensive security research, vulnerability analysis, CMS-focused application testing, and red team operations.
redteam-source-audit
Focused source-code security review workflow for web applications, CMS extensions, APIs, and supporting services.
redteam-cms
Focused methodology for authorized CMS fingerprinting, component inventory, misconfiguration review, and vulnerability validation.
redteam-exploit-validation
Focused workflow for validating exploitability safely and turning candidate issues into reproducible, bounded proof.
redteam-recon
Focused reconnaissance workflow for authorized security assessments, bug bounty triage, lab targets, and CTF infrastructure.