agentic-eval

agentic-eval is a skill for Codex from PracticalSwan/agent-skills. It costs 50 tokens per session (1,904 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A structured review workflow for checking AI-generated code, documents, analysis, or plans against explicit criteria.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to define a scoring rubric, review candidate work, turn feedback into changes, and repeat until the acceptance threshold or iteration limit is reached.
Why use it?
It reduces the risk of accepting incomplete or low-quality output after only one draft.

Skill for Codex

Written for Codex: reads $CODEX_HOME. Also seen: mentions subagents; mentions Claude Code; mentions Codex.

Good fit Use it to define a scoring rubric, review candidate work, turn feedback into changes, and repeat until the acceptance threshold or iteration limit is reached.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/practicalswan/agent-skills/agentic-eval
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 PracticalSwan/agent-skills --skill agentic-eval
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/PracticalSwan/agent-skills

Made for: 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 agentic-eval

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

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/practicalswan/agent-skills/agentic-eval"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/practicalswan/agent-skills/agentic-eval.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 50 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,904 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 warn 7 Sept 2026
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to high

These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →

  • high Prompt Injection · line 156
    Hidden instructions were detected in comments or invisible text. These could contain malicious directives. Manual review is recommended.
    Fix: Audit all comments and invisible characters. Remove any instructions that direct the agent to perform unauthorized actions. Use plain, reviewable content.
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 $0.00050 $0.01904
Opus 5.5 $0.00020 $0.00762
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00010 $0.00381
Haiku 4.5 $0.00005 $0.00190

Measured 1mo ago against content hash 2255d2a78263, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

agentic-eval 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.

agentic-eval/SKILL.md · 235 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 235 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Agentic Evaluation Patterns

Patterns for self-improvement through iterative evaluation and refinement.

Overview

Evaluation patterns enable agents to assess and improve their own outputs, moving beyond single-shot generation to iterative refinement loops.

Generate → Evaluate → Critique → Refine → Output
    ↑                              │
    └──────────────────────────────┘

When to Use

  • Quality-critical generation: Code, reports, analysis requiring high accuracy
  • Tasks with clear evaluation criteria: Defined success metrics exist
  • Content requiring specific standards: Style guides, compliance, formatting

Pattern 1: Basic Reflection

Agent evaluates and improves its own output through self-critique.

def reflect_and_refine(task: str, criteria: list[str], max_iterations: int = 3) -> str:
    """Generate with reflection loop."""
    output = llm(f"Complete this task:\n{task}")

    for i in range(max_iterations):
        # Self-critique
        critique = llm(f"""
        Evaluate this output against criteria: {criteria}
        Output: {output}
        Rate each: PASS/FAIL with feedback as JSON.
        """)

        critique_data = json.loads(critique)
        all_pass = all(c["status"] == "PASS" for c in critique_data.values())
        if all_pass:
            return output

        # Refine based on critique
        failed = {k: v["feedback"] for k, v in critique_data.items() if v["status"] == "FAIL"}
        output = llm(f"Improve to address: {failed}\nOriginal: {output}")

    return output

Key insight: Use structured JSON output for reliable parsing of critique results.


Pattern 2: Evaluator-Optimizer

Separate generation and evaluation into distinct components for clearer responsibilities.

class EvaluatorOptimizer:
    def __init__(self, score_threshold: float = 0.8):
        self.score_threshold = score_threshold

    def generate(self, task: str) -> str:
        return llm(f"Complete: {task}")

    def evaluate(self, output: str, task: str) -> dict:
        return json.loads(llm(f"""
        Evaluate output for task: {task}
        Output: {output}
        Return JSON: {{"overall_score": 0-1, "dimensions": {{"accuracy": ..., "clarity": ...}}}}
        """))

    def optimize(self, output: str, feedback: dict) -> str:
        return llm(f"Improve based on feedback: {feedback}\nOutput: {output}")

    def run(self, task: str, max_iterations: int = 3) -> str:
        output = self.generate(task)
        for _ in range(max_iterations):
            evaluation = self.evaluate(output, task)
            if evaluation["overall_score"] >= self.score_threshold:
                break
            output = self.optimize(output, evaluation)
        return output

Read the full file on GitHub · 235 lines

Files

What ships with it

1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.

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 Changed · +48 lines 2255d2a78263
  2. 1mo ago Changed 2df6d6efc3dd
  3. 1mo ago Changed b1b2bfe19604
  4. 1mo ago First seen · 187 lines · 50 tokens per session scan A 470b923d249b

Subscribe to this mod's changes

agentic-eval is a skill published in the GitHub repository PracticalSwan/agent-skills (21 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 50 tokens to every session and 1,904 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 2026-08-30.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

deepeval

Use when discussing or working with DeepEval (the python AI evaluation framework).

sammcj/agentic-coding · 19 tokens

iterative-refinement

Disciplined, measurable iteration for a substantial refinement or investigation: loop against verifiable pass/fail conditions, fan work out to subagents, and keep the main context lean. Use when improving something measurable over repeated cycles (tuning a metric or detector, refactoring against a regression bar)…

sammcj/agentic-coding · 100 tokens

hatch3r-browser-verify

Opt-in browser verification skill — spec-run-first Playwright verification (assertions execute in the runner, agent reads only failures), axe-core a11y audits, toHaveScreenshot() regression diffs, E2E test scaffolds, and snapshot-mode exploratory driving. Default ON for UI-affecting agent invocations; disable globally…

hatch3r/hatch3r · 83 tokens

hatch3r-feature

End-to-end feature implementation workflow. Covers data model, domain logic, API, and UI as a vertical slice. Use when implementing new features or working on feature request issues.

hatch3r/hatch3r · 41 tokens

hatch3r-qa-path

Produces a human-run manual QA test path from a PR, branch diff, or uncommitted working tree — a risk-ordered table of steps, expected results, and automated-coverage references plus a shippability sign-off. Rows are auto-proven via delegated verification sub-agents before emission, so the human walks only what…

hatch3r/hatch3r · 100 tokens

hatch3r-a11y-audit

Runs a WCAG AA accessibility audit with findings and fixes across 7 scan categories (keyboard, contrast, ARIA, reduced motion, screen reader, high contrast, automated axe). Use when auditing and remediating accessibility.

hatch3r/hatch3r · 55 tokens