--- name: agentv-eval-builder description: Create and maintain AgentV YAML evaluation files for testing AI agent performance. Use this skill when creating new eval files, adding eval cases, or configuring custom evaluators (code validators or LLM judges) for agent testing workflows. --- # AgentV Eval Builder ## Schema Reference - Schema: `references/eval-schema.json` (JSON Schema for validation and tooling) - Format: YAML or JSONL (see below) - Examples: `references/example-evals.md` ## Feature Reference - Rubrics: `references/rubric-evaluator.md` - Structured criteria-based evaluation - Composite Evaluators: `references/composite-evaluator.md` - Combine multiple evaluators - Tool Trajectory: `references/tool-trajectory-evaluator.md` - Validate agent tool usage - Structured Data + Metrics: `references/structured-data-evaluators.md` - `field_accuracy`, `latency`, `cost` - Custom Evaluators: `references/custom-evaluators.md` - Code and LLM judge templates - Batch CLI: `references/batch-cli-evaluator.md` - Evaluate batch runner output (JSONL) - Compare: `references/compare-command.md` - Compare evaluation results between runs ## Structure Requirements - Root level: `description` (optional), `execution` (with `target`), `evalcases` (required) - Eval case fields: `id` (required), `expected_outcome` (required), `input_messages` or `input` (required) - Optional fields: `expected_messages` (or `expected_output`), `conversation_id`, `rubrics`, `execution` - `expected_messages` is optional - omit for outcome-only evaluation where the LLM judge evaluates based on `expected_outcome` criteria alone - Message fields: `role` (required), `content` (required) - Message roles: `system`, `user`, `assistant`, `tool` ## Input/Output Shorthand (Aliases) For simpler eval cases, use shorthand aliases instead of the verbose `input_messages` and `expected_messages`: | Alias | Canonical | Description | |-------|-----------|-------------| | `input` | `input_messages` | String expands to single user message | | `expected_output` | `expected_messages` | String/object expands to single assistant message | **String shorthand:** ```yaml evalcases: - id: simple-test expected_outcome: Correct answer input: "What is 2+2?" # Expands to [{role: user, content: "..."}] expected_output: "The answer is 4" # Expands to [{role: assistant, content: "..."}] ``` **Object shorthand** (for structured output validation): ```yaml evalcases: - id: structured-output expected_outcome: Risk assessment input: "Analyze this transaction" expected_output: # Expands to assistant message with object content riskLevel: High confidence: 0.95 ``` **Array syntax** still works for multi-message conversations: ```yaml input: - role: system content: "You are a calculator" - role: user content: "What is 2+2?" ``` **Precedence:** Canonical names (`input_messages`, `expected_messages`) take precedence when both are specified. - Content types: `text` (inline), `file` (relative or absolute path) - Attachments (type: `file`) should default to the `user` role - File paths: Relative (from eval file dir) or absolute with "/" prefix (from repo root) ## JSONL Format For large-scale evaluations, use JSONL (one eval case per line) instead of YAML: **dataset.jsonl:** ```jsonl {"id": "test-1", "expected_outcome": "Correct answer", "input_messages": [{"role": "user", "content": "What is 2+2?"}]} {"id": "test-2", "expected_outcome": "Clear explanation", "input_messages": [{"role": "user", "content": [{"type": "text", "value": "Review this"}, {"type": "file", "value": "./code.py"}]}]} ``` **dataset.yaml (optional sidecar for defaults):** ```yaml description: My dataset dataset: my-tests execution: target: azure_base evaluator: llm_judge ``` Benefits: Git-friendly diffs, streaming-compatible, easy programmatic generation. Per-case fields override sidecar defaults. See `examples/features/basic-jsonl/` for complete example. ## Custom Evaluators Configure multiple evaluators per eval case via `execution.evaluators` array. ### Code Evaluators Scripts that validate output programmatically: ```yaml execution: evaluators: - name: json_format_validator type: code_judge script: uv run validate_output.py cwd: ../../evaluators/scripts ``` **Contract:** - Input (stdin): JSON with `question`, `expected_outcome`, `reference_answer`, `candidate_answer`, `guideline_files`, `input_files`, `input_messages`, `expected_messages`, `output_messages`, `trace_summary` - Output (stdout): JSON with `score` (0.0-1.0), `hits`, `misses`, `reasoning` **Target Proxy:** Code evaluators can access an LLM through the target proxy for sophisticated evaluation logic (e.g., Contextual Precision, semantic similarity). Enable with `target: {}`: ```yaml execution: evaluators: - name: contextual_precision type: code_judge script: bun run evaluate.ts target: {} # Enable target proxy (max_calls: 50 default) ``` **RAG Evaluation Pattern:** For retrieval-based evals, pass retrieval context via `expected_messages.tool_calls`: ```yaml expected_messages: - role: assistant tool_calls: - tool: vector_search output: results: ["doc1", "doc2", "doc3"] ``` **TypeScript evaluators:** Keep `.ts` source files and run them via Node-compatible loaders such as `npx --yes tsx` so global `agentv` installs stay portable. See `references/custom-evaluators.md` for complete templates, target proxy usage, and command examples. **Template:** See `references/custom-evaluators.md` for Python and TypeScript templates ### LLM Judges Language models evaluate response quality: ```yaml execution: evaluators: - name: content_evaluator type: llm_judge prompt: /evaluators/prompts/correctness.md model: gpt-5-chat ``` ### Tool Trajectory Evaluators Validate agent tool usage patterns (requires `output_messages` with `tool_calls` from provider): ```yaml execution: evaluators: - name: research_check type: tool_trajectory mode: any_order # Options: any_order, in_order, exact minimums: # For any_order mode knowledgeSearch: 2 expected: # For in_order/exact modes - tool: knowledgeSearch - tool: documentRetrieve ``` See `references/tool-trajectory-evaluator.md` for modes and configuration. ### Multiple Evaluators Define multiple evaluators to run sequentially. The final score is a weighted average of all results. ```yaml execution: evaluators: - name: format_check # Runs first type: code_judge script: uv run validate_json.py - name: content_check # Runs second type: llm_judge ``` ### Rubric Evaluator Inline rubrics for structured criteria-based evaluation: ```yaml evalcases: - id: explanation-task expected_outcome: Clear explanation of quicksort input_messages: - role: user content: Explain quicksort rubrics: - Mentions divide-and-conquer approach - Explains the partition step - id: complexity description: States time complexity correctly weight: 2.0 required: true ``` See `references/rubric-evaluator.md` for detailed rubric configuration. ### Composite Evaluator Combine multiple evaluators with aggregation: ```yaml execution: evaluators: - name: release_gate type: composite evaluators: - name: safety type: llm_judge prompt: ./prompts/safety.md - name: quality type: llm_judge prompt: ./prompts/quality.md aggregator: type: weighted_average weights: safety: 0.3 quality: 0.7 ``` See `references/composite-evaluator.md` for aggregation types and patterns. ### Batch CLI Evaluation Evaluate external batch runners that process all evalcases in one invocation: ```yaml description: Batch CLI evaluation execution: target: batch_cli evalcases: - id: case-001 expected_outcome: Returns decision=CLEAR expected_messages: - role: assistant content: decision: CLEAR input_messages: - role: user content: row: id: case-001 amount: 5000 execution: evaluators: - name: decision-check type: code_judge script: bun run ./scripts/check-output.ts cwd: . ``` **Key pattern:** - Batch runner reads eval YAML via `--eval` flag, outputs JSONL keyed by `id` - Each evalcase has its own evaluator to validate its corresponding output - Use structured `expected_messages.content` for expected output fields See `references/batch-cli-evaluator.md` for full implementation guide. ## Example ```yaml description: Example showing basic features and conversation threading execution: target: default evalcases: - id: code-review-basic expected_outcome: Assistant provides helpful code analysis input_messages: - role: system content: You are an expert code reviewer. - role: user content: - type: text value: |- Review this function: ```python def add(a, b): return a + b ``` - type: file value: /prompts/python.instructions.md expected_messages: - role: assistant content: |- The function is simple and correct. Suggestions: - Add type hints: `def add(a: int, b: int) -> int:` - Add docstring - Consider validation for edge cases ```