llm-evaluation

llm-evaluation is a skill for Claude Code from martineserios/thebrana. It costs 31 tokens per session (1,257 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A set of methods for evaluating large language model applications, which are software systems that generate or analyze text with AI. It covers automated scores, human reviews, comparisons, benchmarks, and regression checks.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to compare models or prompts, establish baselines, test generated text or classifications, evaluate search-based answers, and monitor quality over time.
Why use it?
It helps measure whether an AI system is producing useful results and whether a change improves or harms its quality.

Skill for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: allowed-tools in frontmatter. Also seen: names the AskUserQuestion tool.

Part of the brana plugin — 56 skills, 4 commands, 14 agents, 13 hooks shipped together

Good fit Use it to compare models or prompts, establish baselines, test generated text or classifications, evaluate search-based answers, and monitor quality over time.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/martineserios/thebrana/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 martineserios/thebrana --skill llm-evaluation
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/martineserios/thebrana

Made for: Claude Code.

Or install brana, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 56 skills, 4 commands, 14 agents, 13 hooks.

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/martineserios/thebrana/llm-evaluation/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/martineserios/thebrana/llm-evaluation)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/martineserios/thebrana/llm-evaluation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/martineserios/thebrana/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/martineserios/thebrana/llm-evaluation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/martineserios/thebrana/llm-evaluation.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 31 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,257 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 $0.00031 $0.01257
Opus 5 $0.00015 $0.00629
Sonnet 5 $0.00006 $0.00251
Haiku 4.5 $0.00003 $0.00126

Measured 9d ago against content hash df3dda3d7b0f, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-09, 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 9d 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.

system/skills/acquired/llm-evaluation/SKILL.md · 148 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 148 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

QUARANTINE — Community tier. Patterns here are unvalidated. Read-only tools only. Verify against official docs (Anthropic, LangSmith) before applying to production.

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

Text Generation:

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

Classification:

  • Accuracy, Precision/Recall/F1, Confusion Matrix, AUC-ROC

Retrieval (RAG):

  • MRR, NDCG, Precision@K, Recall@K

2. LLM-as-Judge

Use stronger LLMs to evaluate weaker model outputs.

Approaches:

  • Pointwise: Score individual responses
  • Pairwise: Compare two responses (A/B)
  • Reference-based: Compare to gold standard
  • Reference-free: Judge without ground truth
from anthropic import Anthropic
from pydantic import BaseModel, Field
import json

class QualityRating(BaseModel):
    accuracy: int = Field(ge=1, le=10)
    helpfulness: int = Field(ge=1, le=10)
    clarity: int = Field(ge=1, le=10)
    reasoning: str

async def llm_judge_quality(response: str, question: str, context: str = None) -> QualityRating:
    client = Anthropic()
    prompt = f"""Rate the following response:
Question: {question}
{f'Context: {context}' if context else ''}
Response: {response}

Provide ratings in JSON: {{"accuracy": <1-10>, "helpfulness": <1-10>, "clarity": <1-10>, "reasoning": "<explanation>"}}"""
    message = client.messages.create(
        model="claude-sonnet-4-6", max_tokens=500,
        system="You are an expert evaluator of AI responses.",
        messages=[{"role": "user", "content": prompt}]
    )
    return QualityRating(**json.loads(message.content[0].text))

Read the full file on GitHub · 148 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. 9d ago First seen · 148 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A df3dda3d7b0f

Subscribe to this mod's changes

llm-evaluation is a skill published in the GitHub repository martineserios/thebrana (3 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 1,257 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 2026-08-31.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

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.

chandrudp29/skillhub · 39 tokens

rag-evaluator

Evaluate RAG pipeline quality across faithfulness, relevance, and hallucination metrics. Use when user asks to test, benchmark, or improve a RAG system, or when RAG outputs look wrong.

chandrudp29/skillhub · 44 tokens

eval-designer

Use this skill when building evaluation frameworks to measure LLM quality, safety, accuracy, or alignment including test suites, human eval rubrics, automated evals, and metrics design. Not for training or fine-tuning models. Not for dataset curation or benchmark comparison across publicly available models.

NickCrew/Claude-Cortex · 62 tokens

generate-rag-dataset

Generate a synthetic evaluation dataset from your RAG knowledge base. Creates diverse Q&A pairs with expected answers and relevant context, ready for LangWatch experiments and platform import. Use when you need test data for your RAG pipeline.

langwatch/langwatch · 51 tokens

trulens-evaluation-workflow

Systematically evaluate your LLM application with TruLens.

truera/trulens · 18 tokens

datasets

Generate realistic synthetic evaluation datasets by analyzing the user's codebase, prompts, production traces, and reference materials. Interactive and consultant-style. Asks clarifying questions, proposes a plan, generates a preview for approval, then delivers a complete dataset uploaded to LangWatch. Use when user…

langwatch/langwatch · 75 tokens