VérificationSûr100100/100
agent-eval
Head-to-head comparison of coding agents (Claude Code, Aider, Codex, etc.) on custom tasks with pass rate, cost, time, and consistency metrics
ou envoie-le directement à ton agent.
Installer dans ton projet
$ npx arboris-cli install agent-evalContenu à copier
---
name: agent-eval
description: Head-to-head comparison of coding agents (Claude Code, Aider, Codex, etc.) on custom tasks with pass rate, cost, time, and consistency metrics
metadata:
origin: ECC
tools: Read, Write, Edit, Bash, Grep, Glob
---
# Agent Eval Skill
A lightweight CLI tool for comparing coding agents head-to-head on reproducible tasks. Every "which coding agent is best?" comparison runs on vibes — this tool systematizes it.
## When to Activate
- Comparing coding agents (Claude Code, Aider, Codex, etc.) on your own codebase
- Measuring agent performance before adopting a new tool or model
- Running regression checks when an agent updates its model or tooling
- Producing data-backed agent selection decisions for a team
## Installation
> **Note:** Install agent-eval from its repository after reviewing the source.
## Core Concepts
### YAML Task Definitions
Define tasks declaratively. Each task specifies what to do, which files to touch, and how to judge success:
```yaml
name: add-retry-logic
description: Add exponential backoff retry to the HTTP client
repo: ./my-project
files:
- src/http_client.py
prompt: |
Add retry logic with exponential backoff to all HTTP requests.
Max 3 retries. Initial delay 1s, max delay 30s.
judge:
- type: pytest
command: pytest tests/test_http_client.py -v
- type: grep
pattern: "exponential_backoff|retry"
files: src/http_client.py
commit: "abc1234" # pin to specific commit for reproducibility
```
### Git Worktree Isolation
Each agent run gets its own git worktree — no Docker required. This provides reproducibility isolation so agents cannot interfere with each other or corrupt the base repo.
### Metrics Collected
| Metric | What It Measures |
|--------|-----------------|
| Pass rate | Did the agent produce code that passes the judge? |
| Cost | API spend per task (when available) |
| Time | Wall-clock seconds to completion |
| Consistency | Pass rate across repeated runs (e.g., 3/3 = 100%) |
## Workflow
### 1. Define Tasks
Create a `tasks/` directory with YAML files, one per task:
```bash
mkdir tasks
# Write task definitions (see template above)
```
### 2. Run Agents
Execute agents against your tasks:
```bash
agent-eval run --task tasks/add-retry-logic.yaml --agent claude-code --agent aider --runs 3
```
Each run:
1. Creates a fresh git worktree from the specified commit
2. Hands the prompt to the agent
3. Runs the judge criteria
4. Records pass/fail, cost, and time
### 3. Compare Results
Generate a comparison report:
```bash
agent-eval report --format table
```
```
Task: add-retry-logic (3 runs each)
┌──────────────┬───────────┬────────┬────────┬─────────────┐
│ Agent │ Pass Rate │ Cost │ Time │ Consistency │
├──────────────┼───────────┼────────┼────────┼─────────────┤
│ claude-code │ 3/3 │ $0.12 │ 45s │ 100% │
│ aider │ 2/3 │ $0.08 │ 38s │ 67% │
└──────────────┴───────────┴────────┴────────┴─────────────┘
```
## Judge Types
### Code-Based (deterministic)
```yaml
judge:
- type: pytest
command: pytest tests/ -v
- type: command
command: npm run build
```
### Pattern-Based
```yaml
judge:
- type: grep
pattern: "class.*Retry"
files: src/**/*.py
```
### Model-Based (LLM-as-judge)
```yaml
judge:
- type: llm
prompt: |
Does this implementation correctly handle exponential backoff?
Check for: max retries, increasing delays, jitter.
```
## Best Practices
- **Start with 3-5 tasks** that represent your real workload, not toy examples
- **Run at least 3 trials** per agent to capture variance — agents are non-deterministic
- **Pin the commit** in your task YAML so results are reproducible across days/weeks
- **Include at least one deterministic judge** (tests, build) per task — LLM judges add noise
- **Track cost alongside pass rate** — a 95% agent at 10x the cost may not be the right choice
- **Version your task definitions** — they are test fixtures, treat them as code
## Links
- Repository: [github.com/joaquinhuigomez/agent-eval](https://github.com/joaquinhuigomez/agent-eval)Colle ce Markdown dans ton agent ou utilise les boutons ci-dessus pour l’écrire dans ton projet.
Ce que fait agent-eval
Comparing coding agents (Claude Code, Aider, Codex, etc.) on your own codebase
Measuring agent performance before adopting a new tool or model
Running regression checks when an agent updates its model or tooling
Producing data-backed agent selection decisions for a team
Comment utiliser agent-eval
1
Copie le prompt
Un clic copie le prompt packagé (ou l'envoie à ton agent).
2
L'agent installe le skill
Il ajoute le SKILL.md et ses ressources à ton projet.
3
Activation automatique
Le skill s'active dès que le contexte correspond.
Déclencheurs pour agent-eval
Dis simplement à ton agent quelque chose comme :
Applique le skill agent-eval à cette tâche
Utilise agent-eval pour améliorer cette implémentation
Passe en revue ce sujet avec agent-eval
Skills liés à agent-eval
agent-evaluation-designer__microsoft-cat-agent-skills__submissions-ccc7ffa72f64
Use this skill whenever the user wants to evaluate, test, or validate an AI agent, decide whether an agent is ready to ship or go live, choose how to grade an agent's answers (exact match, similarity, meaning, keywords, quality, or custom), design a test set of questions and expected answers, or interpret evaluation results into a go/no-go decision. Invoke it before the user hand-builds tests or declares an agent "done."agent-self-evaluation
Use after completing any non-trivial task. The agent self-rates its output on 5 axes — accuracy, completeness, clarity, actionability, conciseness — with concrete evidence per criterion. Produces a structured 1-5 scorecard with specific improvement suggestions.scholar-evaluation
Structured scholarly-work evaluation for papers, proposals, literature reviews, methods sections, evidence quality, citation support, and research-writing feedback.