llm-evaluation

llm-evaluation is a skill for Claude Code from HermeticOrmus/LibreUIUX-Claude-Code. It costs 40 tokens per session (3,140 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A guide to evaluating applications that use large language models (LLMs). It covers automated scores, human review, benchmarks, comparisons, and tracking changes over time.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to compare models or prompts, measure generated text and retrieval quality, detect regressions, establish baselines, and investigate unexpected behaviour.
Why use it?
It helps reveal whether an AI application is improving, regressing, or producing unreliable answers before changes reach users.

Skill for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: shipped in a Claude Code plugin.

Part of the llm-application-dev plugin — 4 skills shipped together

Good fit Use it to compare models or prompts, measure generated text and retrieval quality, detect regressions, establish baselines, and investigate unexpected behaviour.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/hermeticormus/libreuiux-claude-code/llm-evaluation
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 HermeticOrmus/LibreUIUX-Claude-Code --skill llm-evaluation
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/HermeticOrmus/LibreUIUX-Claude-Code

Made for: Claude Code.

Or install llm-application-dev, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 4 skills.

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 llm-evaluation

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hermeticormus/libreuiux-claude-code/llm-evaluation/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/hermeticormus/libreuiux-claude-code/llm-evaluation)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/hermeticormus/libreuiux-claude-code/llm-evaluation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hermeticormus/libreuiux-claude-code/llm-evaluation/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 llm-evaluation

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/hermeticormus/libreuiux-claude-code/llm-evaluation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hermeticormus/libreuiux-claude-code/llm-evaluation.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 40 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 3,140 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.
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 $0.00040 $0.03140
Opus 5.5 $0.00016 $0.01256
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00008 $0.00628
Haiku 4.5 $0.00004 $0.00314

Measured 26d ago against content hash b37039b062cd, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

llm-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 26d 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.

Origin

Copies of this mod

5 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:

plugins/llm-application-dev/skills/llm-evaluation/SKILL.md · 472 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 472 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

LLM Evaluation

Master comprehensive evaluation strategies for LLM applications, from automated metrics to human evaluation and A/B testing.

When to Use This Skill

  • Measuring LLM application performance systematically
  • Comparing different models or prompts
  • Detecting performance regressions before deployment
  • Validating improvements from prompt changes
  • Building confidence in production systems
  • Establishing baselines and tracking progress over time
  • Debugging unexpected model behavior

Core Evaluation Types

1. Automated Metrics

Fast, repeatable, scalable evaluation using computed scores.

Text Generation:

  • BLEU: N-gram overlap (translation)
  • ROUGE: Recall-oriented (summarization)
  • METEOR: Semantic similarity
  • BERTScore: Embedding-based similarity
  • Perplexity: Language model confidence

Classification:

  • Accuracy: Percentage correct
  • Precision/Recall/F1: Class-specific performance
  • Confusion Matrix: Error patterns
  • AUC-ROC: Ranking quality

Retrieval (RAG):

  • MRR: Mean Reciprocal Rank
  • NDCG: Normalized Discounted Cumulative Gain
  • Precision@K: Relevant in top K
  • Recall@K: Coverage in top K

2. Human Evaluation

Manual assessment for quality aspects difficult to automate.

Dimensions:

  • Accuracy: Factual correctness
  • Coherence: Logical flow
  • Relevance: Answers the question
  • Fluency: Natural language quality
  • Safety: No harmful content
  • Helpfulness: Useful to the user

3. LLM-as-Judge

Use stronger LLMs to evaluate weaker model outputs.

Approaches:

  • Pointwise: Score individual responses
  • Pairwise: Compare two responses
  • Reference-based: Compare to gold standard
  • Reference-free: Judge without ground truth

Quick Start

from llm_eval import EvaluationSuite, Metric

# Define evaluation suite
suite = EvaluationSuite([
    Metric.accuracy(),
    Metric.bleu(),
    Metric.bertscore(),
    Metric.custom(name="groundedness", fn=check_groundedness)
])

# Prepare test cases
test_cases = [
    {
        "input": "What is the capital of France?",
        "expected": "Paris",
        "context": "France is a country in Europe. Paris is its capital."
    },
    # ... more test cases
]

# Run evaluation
results = suite.evaluate(
    model=your_model,
    test_cases=test_cases
)

print(f"Overall Accuracy: {results.metrics['accuracy']}")
print(f"BLEU Score: {results.metrics['bleu']}")

Read the full file on GitHub · 472 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. 26d ago First seen · 472 lines · 40 tokens per session scan A b37039b062cd

Subscribe to this mod's changes

llm-evaluation is a skill published in the GitHub repository HermeticOrmus/LibreUIUX-Claude-Code (115 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 3,140 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-09-20.