Skill Evaluation Loop
Use this skill when a skill should become more reliable, not merely longer.
Evaluation-Driven Workflow
- Write evaluation cases before editing the skill:
- 3 positive triggers
- 3 negative triggers
- expected tools or no tools
- expected output shape
- failure rubric
- Test four failure modes:
- Trigger failure: wrong skill fires or right skill does not fire.
- Execution failure: skill fires but output or tool calls are wrong.
- Token budget failure: skill body is too large or noisy when co-loaded.
- Regression failure: new skill overlaps with existing skills.
- For action-allowed skills, validate tool trajectory, not just final output.
- Run pass^k style repeated checks for high-stakes skills. One lucky pass is not reliability.
- Promote by tier:
- Read-only: trigger accuracy and output quality.
- Draft-only: golden cases and human review.
- Action-allowed: adversarial tests, trajectory checks, rollback plan, and no unsafe side effects.
References
- Read
references/day3_agent_skills.txtfor skill failure modes, eval coverage, meta-skills, token budget, and deployment checklist. - Read
references/day4_security_evaluation.txtfor trajectory inspection, self-repair, security evaluation, and online failure mining.
Improvement Rules
- Tune the description before bloating the body.
- Move detail into
references/; move deterministic behavior intoscripts/. - Treat every user correction as labeled failure data.
- Keep human review in the loop for skill changes that broaden authority.
Evaluation Prompts
- Positive: "Evaluate this skill and improve its trigger reliability." Expected: trigger, execution, token-budget, and regression cases before edits.
- Positive edge: "This action-allowed skill works once; prove it is safe to promote." Expected: trajectory checks, adversarial cases, rollback, and human review.
- Negative: "Use this skill to complete the user task." Expected: no skill-evaluation loop unless the skill itself is being tested or improved.