
LLM Evaluation
FreeSystematic evaluation strategies for LLM performance.
Free · Opens the source repo
What LLM Evaluation does
LLM Evaluation provides a structured approach to assess the performance of large language models (LLMs) through various evaluation strategies. This skill enables developers and researchers to implement both automated metrics and human feedback, making it easier to gauge the effectiveness of LLM applications. By utilizing a combination of quantitative metrics and qualitative assessments, users can ensure that their models meet the desired performance standards before deployment.
The skill encompasses several core evaluation types, including automated metrics that allow for fast and repeatable assessments. Key metrics such as BLEU, ROUGE, and BERTScore provide insights into text generation quality, while classification metrics like accuracy and precision help evaluate model performance in specific tasks. Additionally, retrieval metrics such as NDCG and Precision@K are included for applications involving information retrieval. This comprehensive set of metrics enables users to systematically measure and compare LLM performance across different models and prompts.
Human evaluation is also a crucial aspect of this skill, allowing users to assess dimensions like accuracy, coherence, and fluency that are often challenging to quantify automatically. By incorporating both automated and human evaluations, LLM Evaluation helps build confidence in the quality of AI applications, making it a valuable tool for developers seeking to validate their models and track performance over time. The skill also aids in debugging unexpected model behavior and establishing baselines for future improvements.
Overall, LLM Evaluation is designed for developers and researchers who need to rigorously evaluate LLM performance, ensuring that their applications are reliable and effective in real-world scenarios.
When to use it
Use this skill when you need to measure, compare, or validate the performance of LLM applications systematically.
When not to use it
This skill may not be suitable for simple applications where performance evaluation is not critical or for scenarios requiring real-time feedback without structured assessment.
What you can build with it
Performance Comparison
Use LLM Evaluation to systematically compare the performance of different language models or prompts to determine the best option for your application.
Regression Detection
Implement this skill to detect performance regressions in your models before they are deployed, ensuring consistent quality over time.
Human Feedback Integration
Incorporate human evaluation to assess aspects of model outputs that automated metrics cannot capture, enhancing the overall quality of your AI applications.
How to install LLM Evaluation
View source1. Install with the skills CLI
npx skills add wshobson/agents/llm-evaluation --agent claude-code2. Or install it manually
Download the skill folder and drop it into ~/.claude/skills/ for all projects, or .claude/skills/ to scope it to one repo. Restart Claude Code so it picks up the new skill.
Anthropic's agentic coding CLI, and the reference implementation of Agent Skills. Drop a skill folder into ~/.claude/skills and Claude Code loads it automatically whenever a task matches the skill's description. Claude Code docs
Inside SKILL.md
Written by wshobsonLLM 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 dataclasses import dataclass
from typing import Callable
import numpy as np
@dataclass
class Metric:
name: str
fn: Callable
@staticmethod
def accuracy():
return Metric("accuracy", calculate_accuracy)
@staticmethod
def bleu():
return Metric("bleu", calculate_bleu)
@staticmethod
def bertscore():
return Metric("bertscore", calculate_bertscore)
@staticmethod
def custom(name: str, fn: Callable):
return Metric(name, fn)
class EvaluationSuite:
def __init__(self, metrics: list[Metric]):
self.metrics = metrics
async def evaluate(self, model, test_cases: list[dict]) -> dict:
results = {m.name: [] for m in self.metrics}
for test in test_cases:
prediction = await model.predict(test["input"])
for metric in self.metrics:
score = metric.fn(
prediction=prediction,
reference=test.get("expected"),
context=test.get("context")
)
results[metric.name].append(score)
return {
"metrics": {k: np.mean(v) for k, v in results.items()},
"raw_scores": results
}
# Usage
suite = EvaluationSuite([
Metric.accuracy(),
Metric.bleu(),
Metric.bertscore(),
Metric.custom("groundedness", check_groundedness)
])
test_cases = [
{
"input": "What is the capital of France?",
"expected": "Paris",
"context": "France is a country in Europe. Paris is its capital."
},
]
results = await suite.evaluate(model=your_model, test_cases=test_cases)
Detailed patterns and worked examples
Detailed pattern documentation lives in references/details.md. Read that file when the navigation tier above is insufficient.
Frequently asked questions about LLM Evaluation
Similar skills
Arize Evaluator
Streamline LLM evaluation workflows on Arize.
Troubleshoot
Analyze logs to understand chat agent behavior.
Agentic Evaluation
Enhance AI outputs through iterative evaluation and refinement.
RAG Evaluation
Evaluate retrieval-augmented generation benchmarks efficiently.
NV-Reason-CXR
Run smoke tests for chest X-ray reasoning models.
Clinical ASR Evaluation
Score and evaluate clinical ASR manifests effectively.
