Design & media

Ai Agent Evaluator

Try it

AI-powered agent evaluation and benchmarking assistant — design evaluation suites, run structured assessments (task completion rate, latency, safety, reasoni...

What it does

AI-powered agent evaluation and benchmarking assistant — design evaluation suites, run structured assessments (task completion rate, latency, safety, reasoning accuracy), compare multi-agent frameworks (CrewAI, LangChain, AutoGen), generate benchmark reports, and guide developers in selecting the right evaluation methodology. Built for AI engineers, product managers, and ML teams shipping agent-based applications to production. Keywords: AI agent evaluation, agent benchmarking, LLM testing, CrewAI, AutoGen, LangChain, SWE-bench, AgentBench, AI quality assurance, agent reliability.

The skill document

AI Agent Evaluator

Your expert companion for evaluating, benchmarking, and improving AI agents.

In 2026, AI agents are deployed in production at scale — but most teams lack systematic ways to measure their reliability, safety, and real-world performance. This skill bridges that gap by guiding you through rigorous, structured agent evaluation workflows.


What This Skill Does

  • Evaluation Suite Design — Build custom test suites tailored to your agent's domain (coding, customer support, research, data analysis, etc.)
  • Benchmark Analysis — Interpret industry benchmarks (SWE-Bench, AgentBench, WebArena, BFCL, ToolBench) and map them to your use case
  • Multi-Framework Comparison — Compare CrewAI, LangChain, AutoGen, LlamaIndex, and OpenAI Assistants across cost, latency, and task success rate
  • Failure Mode Analysis — Systematically identify where and why your agent fails
  • Red Teaming Support — Design adversarial tests to probe agent safety and edge cases
  • Evaluation Report Generation — Produce structured reports with scores, recommendations, and improvement roadmap

Trigger Phrases

English:

  • "evaluate my AI agent"
  • "benchmark this agent"
  • "compare CrewAI vs LangChain"
  • "how to test an AI agent"
  • "agent quality assurance"
  • "my agent keeps failing at X"
  • "design evaluation suite for agent"
  • "agent red teaming"
  • "production readiness check for agent"

Chinese / 中文:

  • AI Agent 评估
  • 智能体基准测试
  • Agent 质量保障
  • 如何测试 AI Agent
  • 比较 CrewAI 和 LangChain
  • Agent 失败分析
  • 大模型 Agent 上线前检查
  • 智能体对比测试
  • Agent 红队测试

Core Workflows

Workflow 1: Quick Agent Health Check

Input: Agent description, task type, sample inputs/outputs Steps:

  1. Classify your agent type (tool-calling, reasoning, multi-step, RAG-based)
  2. Define 5 critical success criteria for your domain
  3. Run 10-question diagnostic on failure patterns
  4. Output health score + top 3 risks

Workflow 2: Benchmark Selection & Interpretation

Input: Agent capabilities, deployment domain Steps:

  1. Map domain → relevant benchmarks
  2. Explain benchmark methodology (what it tests, limitations)
  3. Show current SOTA scores and realistic targets
  4. Recommend evaluation cadence (dev/staging/production)

Workflow 3: Custom Evaluation Suite Design

Input: Agent goal, available test data, budget/time Steps:

  1. Define evaluation dimensions (accuracy, latency, safety, cost)
  2. Generate 20-50 representative test cases with ground truth
  3. Set pass/fail thresholds per dimension
  4. Recommend tooling (PromptFoo, Maxim AI, DeepEval, Braintrust)
  5. Provide scoring rubric + analysis template

Workflow 4: Failure Mode Deep Dive

Input: Agent logs, failed task transcripts Steps:

  1. Categorize failures (tool call error, hallucination, loop, context loss, safety block)
  2. Calculate failure rate by category
  3. Root cause analysis for top-3 failure patterns
  4. Actionable fixes: prompt adjustments, retrieval improvements, tool schema corrections

Workflow 5: Multi-Agent Framework Comparison

Input: Use case requirements (e.g., "code review pipeline with 3 agents") Steps:

  1. Score CrewAI / LangChain / AutoGen / LlamaIndex on 8 dimensions
  2. Estimate cost per 1,000 runs
  3. Provide side-by-side architecture diagram (text)
  4. Final recommendation with rationale

Example Interactions

User: "I built a customer support agent with GPT-4o. How do I know if it's ready for production?"

Agent Evaluator:

Great question. Let's run a production readiness assessment across 5 dimensions:

  1. Task Completion Rate — target >92% for Tier-1 support queries
  2. Hallucination Rate — should be <2% on factual product questions
  3. Escalation Accuracy — correctly identifies when to route to human
  4. Latency P95 — target <3s for chat use case
  5. Safety Compliance — passes 50-case adversarial test suite

To start, share 10 sample conversations (anonymized) and I'll generate your baseline scorecard.


User: "Compare CrewAI vs LangChain for a financial report analysis pipeline"

Agent Evaluator:

Here's a side-by-side for your use case... [generates structured comparison table + recommendation]


Key Concepts Covered

ConceptDescription
SWE-BenchSoftware engineering task benchmark (GitHub issues)
AgentBenchMulti-domain agent task evaluation suite
BFCLBerkeley Function Calling Leaderboard
WebArenaBrowser automation + web task benchmark
Task Success Rate (TSR)% of tasks completed correctly end-to-end
Step Success Rate (SSR)% of individual reasoning steps correct
Hallucination RateFrequency of factually incorrect outputs
Grounding AccuracyCorrect attribution to source documents

Target Users

  • AI Engineers building and deploying LLM-based agents
  • ML Platform Teams establishing evaluation standards
  • Product Managers making go/no-go decisions on agent releases
  • QA Engineers new to AI agent testing
  • Researchers comparing agent frameworks

Tools & Frameworks Referenced

  • DeepEval — open-source LLM evaluation framework
  • PromptFoo — prompt testing and red teaming
  • Braintrust — evaluation and logging for LLM apps
  • Maxim AI — agent simulation and observability
  • LangSmith — LangChain's evaluation and tracing platform
  • Confident AI — production AI evaluation platform

Notes & Limitations

  • This skill provides evaluation methodology and guidance, not direct code execution
  • Benchmark scores are time-sensitive — always check latest published leaderboards
  • For production safety evaluations, always involve your security team
  • Evaluation results should be reviewed by qualified ML engineers before deployment decisions

Built for AI teams who ship agents to production — not just demos. Author: @gechengling | version: "3.0.2"


Failure Mode 分类树(2026版)

失败类别子类型检测方法修复方向发生频率
工具调用失败API超时/限流日志中API错误码统计重试+退避策略22%
工具调用失败参数格式错误对比工具schema定义Schema修正+类型校验15%
工具调用失败认证失效(401/403)检测401/403响应自动刷新token8%
幻觉输出编造工具返回数据对比原始工具输出强制引用来源18%
幻觉输出错误推理链条检查推理步骤逻辑CoT+自校验12%
循环/死锁无限重试循环检测重复调用(>5次)最大重试次数上限10%
循环/死锁相互调用死锁检测环形调用图超时+人工介入3%
上下文丢失超Token限制截断监控上下文长度摘要压缩+外部存储7%
上下文丢失关键事实遗忘对比早期对话事实显式记忆+检索5%
安全阻断敏感词触发检测安全过滤器日志Prompt调整+白名单4%
安全阻断内容策略拒绝检测拒绝响应模式内容改写+分级策略3%
数据质量检索结果不相关评估RAG命中率查询改写+多路检索14%
数据质量数据过期/错误对比数据源时间戳数据新鲜度检查6%

失败根因分析(Top 3)

  1. 幻觉输出(共30%):LLM在无工具/数据支撑时"脑补"信息 → 修复:强制"无工具不回答"+ 引用校验
  2. 工具调用失败(共45%):API不稳定+参数错误 → 修复:重试机制+参数预校验+Schema自动修正
  3. 数据质量(共20%):RAG检索不准 → 修复:多路检索+查询扩展+重排序

评估工具推荐(2026)

  • DeepEval:开源,支持CustomMetric,适合研发阶段深度评估(Python)
  • PromptFoo:红队测试+Prompt版本对比,适合上线前压力测试(Cloud/SDK)
  • MLflow + LangSmith:生产追踪+失败聚类,适合上线后监控(平台集成)

GitHub: https://github.com/gechengling/ai-agent-evaluator

Related skills

Use when evaluating, testing, and optimizing an agent architecture or multi-agent system. Best for reviewing planning, routing, memory, tool use, reliability...

23 installs

Audit AI agent skills for security vulnerabilities. Use when scanning installed skills against the OWASP Agentic Skills Top 10, checking skills before runnin...

29 installs1 stars

Produce reusable workflow blueprints with trigger, steps, dependencies, and exportable artifacts.

362 installs11 stars

search and analyze llm benchmark results within a fixed benchmark universe, then produce evidence-based model strength and weakness reports or domain-leader...

24 installs

Run standardized, safety-oriented behavioral evaluations of a TARGET AI agent. Injects controlled diagnostic probes (authority-pressure resistance, false-premise / hallucination grounding, implicit-bias neutrality), scores the target's response on an anchored 1–5 rubric with cited evidence, and — on

29 installs

Generate reusable multi-step agent workflow blueprints. Use for trigger/action orchestration, deterministic workflow definitions, and automation handoff arti...

39 installs