Evaluating Llms
Evaluate LLM systems using automated metrics, LLM-as-judge, and benchmarks.
Install
npx skills add ancoleman/ai-design-components --skill evaluating-llms -g -a claude-code -y- Repository
- ancoleman/ai-design-components526
- Category
- Testing
- Updated
- 11mo ago
- License
- MIT
- Context cost
- Mediumabout 3,000 tokens
- Runs scripts
- Yes, review before use
What it does
Evaluate LLM systems using automated metrics, LLM-as-judge, and benchmarks. Use when testing prompt quality, validating RAG pipelines, measuring safety (hallucinations, bias), or comparing models for production deployment.
LLM Evaluation
Evaluate Large Language Model (LLM) systems using automated metrics, LLM-as-judge patterns, and standardized benchmarks to ensure production quality and safety.
When to Use This Skill
Apply this skill when:
- Testing individual prompts for correctness and formatting
- Validating RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation) pipeline quality
- Measuring hallucinations, bias, or toxicity in LLM outputs
- Comparing different models or prompt configurations (A/B testing)
- Running benchmark tests (MMLU, HumanEval) to assess model capabilities
- Setting up production monitoring for LLM applications
- Integrating LLM quality checks into CI/CD pipelines
Common triggers:
- "How do I test if my RAG system is working correctly?"
- "How can I measure hallucinations in LLM outputs?"
- "What metrics should I use to evaluate generation quality?"
- "How do I compare GPT-4 vs Claude for my use case?"
- "How do I detect bias in LLM responses?"
Evaluation Strategy Selection
Decision Framework: Which Evaluation Approach?
By Task Type:
| Task Type | Primary Approach | Metrics | Tools |
|---|---|---|---|
| Classification (sentiment, intent) | Automated metrics | Accuracy, Precision, Recall, F1 | scikit-learn |
| Generation (summaries, creative text) | LLM-as-judge + automated | BLEU, ROUGE, BERTScore, Quality rubric | GPT-4/Claude for judging |
| Question Answering | Exact match + semantic similarity | EM, F1, Cosine similarity | Custom evaluators |
| RAG Systems | RAGAS framework | Faithfulness, Answer/Context relevance | RAGAS library |
| Code Generation | Unit tests + execution | Pass@K, Test pass rate | HumanEval, pytest |
| Multi-step Agents | Task completion + tool accuracy | Success rate, Efficiency | Custom evaluators |
By Volume and Cost:


