langsmith-evaluator

作成者: langchain-ai

LangSmithの評価パイプラインを構築する際にこのスキルを呼び出してください。以下の3つのコアコンポーネントをカバーします:(1) 評価器の作成 - LLM-as-Judge、カスタムコード;(2)…

npx skills add https://github.com/langchain-ai/skills-benchmarks --skill langsmith-evaluator
Three core components: **(1) Creating Evaluators** - LLM-as-Judge, custom code; **(2) Defining Run Functions** - capture agent outputs/trajectories for evaluation; **(3) Running Evaluations** - locally with `evaluate()` or auto-run via uploaded evaluators. Python and TypeScript examples included. Environment Variables
LANGSMITH_API_KEY=lsv2_pt_your_api_key_here          # REQUIRED
LANGSMITH_PROJECT=your-project-name                   # Check this to know which project has traces
LANGSMITH_WORKSPACE_ID=your-workspace-id              # Optional: for org-scoped keys
OPENAI_API_KEY=your_openai_key                        # For LLM as Judge

Authentication is REQUIRED: either set the LANGSMITH_API_KEY environment variable, or pass the --api-key flag to CLI commands (preferred):

langsmith evaluator list --api-key $LANGSMITH_API_KEY

IMPORTANT: Always check the environment variables or .env file for LANGSMITH_PROJECT before querying or interacting with LangSmith. This tells you which project contains the relevant traces and data. If the LangSmith project is not available, use your best judgement to identify the right one.

Python Dependencies

pip install langsmith langchain-openai python-dotenv

CLI Tool (for uploading evaluators)

curl -sSL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/langchain-ai/langsmith-cli/main/scripts/install.sh | sh

JavaScript Dependencies

npm install langsmith openai

<crucial_requirement>

Golden Rule: Inspect Before You Implement

CRITICAL: Before writing ANY evaluator or extraction logic, you MUST:

  1. Run your agent on sample inputs and capture the actual output
  2. Inspect the output - print it, query LangSmith traces, understand the exact structure
  3. Only then write code that processes that output

Output structures vary significantly by framework, agent type, and configuration. Never assume the shape - always verify first. Query LangSmith traces to when outputs don't contain needed data to understand how to extract from execution. </crucial_requirement>

<evaluator_format>

Offline vs Online Evaluators

Offline Evaluators (attached to datasets):

  • Function signature: (run, example) - receives both run outputs and dataset example
  • Use case: Comparing agent outputs to expected values in a dataset
  • Upload with: --dataset "Dataset Name"

Online Evaluators (attached to projects):

  • Function signature: (run) - receives only run outputs, NO example parameter
  • Use case: Real-time quality checks on production runs (no reference data)
  • Upload with: --project "Project Name"

CRITICAL - Return Format:

  • Each evaluator returns ONE metric only. For multiple metrics, create multiple evaluator functions.
  • Do NOT return {"metric_name": value} or lists of metrics - this will error.

CRITICAL - Local vs Uploaded Differences:

Local evaluate()Uploaded to LangSmith
Column namePython: auto-derived from function name. TypeScript: must include key field or column is untitledComes from evaluator name set at upload time. Do NOT include key — it creates a duplicate column
Python run typeRunTree object → run.outputs (attribute)dictrun["outputs"] (subscript). Handle both: run.outputs if hasattr(run, "outputs") else run.get("outputs", {})
TypeScript run typeAlways attribute access: run.outputs?.fieldAlways attribute access: run.outputs?.field
Python return{"score": value, "comment": "..."}{"score": value, "comment": "..."}
TypeScript return{ key: "name", score: value, comment: "..." }{ score: value, comment: "..." }
</evaluator_format>

<evaluator_types>

  • LLM as Judge - Uses an LLM to grade outputs. Best for subjective quality (accuracy, helpfulness, relevance).
  • Custom Code - Deterministic logic. Best for objective checks (exact match, trajectory validation, format compliance). </evaluator_types>

<llm_judge>

LLM as Judge Evaluators

NOTE: LLM-as-Judge upload is currently not supported by the CLI — only code evaluators are supported. For evaluations against a dataset, STRONGLY PREFER defining local evaluators to use with evaluate(evaluators=[...]).

```python from typing import TypedDict, Annotated from langchain_openai import ChatOpenAI

class Grade(TypedDict): reasoning: Annotated[str, ..., "Explain your reasoning"] is_accurate: Annotated[bool, ..., "True if response is accurate"]

judge = ChatOpenAI(model="gpt-4o-mini", temperature=0).with_structured_output(Grade, method="json_schema", strict=True)

async def accuracy_evaluator(run, example): run_outputs = run.outputs if hasattr(run, "outputs") else run.get("outputs", {}) or {} example_outputs = example.outputs if hasattr(example, "outputs") else example.get("outputs", {}) or {} grade = await judge.ainvoke([{"role": "user", "content": f"Expected: {example_outputs}\nActual: {run_outputs}\nIs this accurate?"}]) return {"score": 1 if grade["is_accurate"] else 0, "comment": grade["reasoning"]}

</python>

<typescript>
```javascript
import OpenAI from "openai";

const openai = new OpenAI();

async function accuracyEvaluator(run, example) {
    const runOutputs = run.outputs ?? {};
    const exampleOutputs = example.outputs ?? {};

    const response = await openai.chat.completions.create({
    model: "gpt-4o-mini",
    temperature: 0,
    response_format: { type: "json_object" },
    messages: [
        { role: "system", content: 'Respond with JSON: {"is_accurate": boolean, "reasoning": string}' },
        { role: "user", content: `Expected: ${JSON.stringify(exampleOutputs)}\nActual: ${JSON.stringify(runOutputs)}\nIs this accurate?` }
    ]
    });

    const grade = JSON.parse(response.choices[0].message.content);
    return { score: grade.is_accurate ? 1 : 0, comment: grade.reasoning };
}

<code_evaluators>

Custom Code Evaluators

Before writing an evaluator:

  1. Inspect your dataset to understand expected field names (see Golden Rule above)
  2. Test your run function and verify its output structure matches the dataset schema
  3. Query LangSmith traces to debug any mismatches
```python def trajectory_evaluator(run, example): run_outputs = run.outputs if hasattr(run, "outputs") else run.get("outputs", {}) or {} example_outputs = example.outputs if hasattr(example, "outputs") else example.get("outputs", {}) or {} # IMPORTANT: Replace these placeholders with your actual field names # 1. Query your LangSmith trace to see what fields exist in run outputs # 2. Check your dataset schema for expected field names # Note: Trajectory data may not appear in default output - verify against trace! actual = run_outputs.get("YOUR_TRAJECTORY_FIELD", []) expected = example_outputs.get("YOUR_EXPECTED_FIELD", []) return {"score": 1 if actual == expected else 0, "comment": f"Expected {expected}, got {actual}"} ``` ```javascript function trajectoryEvaluator(run, example) { const runOutputs = run.outputs ?? {}; const exampleOutputs = example.outputs ?? {}; // IMPORTANT: Replace these placeholders with your actual field names // 1. Query your LangSmith trace to see what fields exist in run outputs // 2. Check your dataset schema for expected field names const actual = runOutputs.YOUR_TRAJECTORY_FIELD ?? []; const expected = exampleOutputs.YOUR_EXPECTED_FIELD ?? []; const match = JSON.stringify(actual) === JSON.stringify(expected); return { score: match ? 1 : 0, comment: `Expected ${JSON.stringify(expected)}, got ${JSON.stringify(actual)}` }; } ```

<run_functions>

Defining Run Functions

Run functions execute your agent and return outputs for evaluation.

CRITICAL - Test Your Run Function First: Before writing evaluators, you MUST test your run function and inspect the actual output structure. Output shapes vary by framework, agent type, and configuration.

Debugging workflow:

  1. Run your agent once on sample input
  2. Query the trace to see the execution structure
  3. Print the raw output and verify against trace to output contains the right data
  4. Adjust the run function as needed
  5. Verify your output matches your dataset schema

Try your hardest to match your run function output to your dataset schema. This makes evaluators simple and reusable. If matching isn't possible, your evaluator must know how to extract and compare the right fields from each side.

```python def run_agent(inputs: dict) -> dict: result = your_agent.run(inputs) # ALWAYS inspect output shape first - run this, check the print, query traces print(f"DEBUG - type: {type(result)}, keys: {result.keys() if hasattr(result, 'keys') else 'N/A'}") print(f"DEBUG - value: {result}") return {"output": result} # Adjust to match your dataset schema ``` ```javascript async function runAgent(inputs) { const result = await yourAgent.invoke(inputs); // ALWAYS inspect output shape first console.log("DEBUG - type:", typeof result, "keys:", Object.keys(result)); console.log("DEBUG - value:", result); return { output: result }; // Adjust to match your dataset schema } ```

Capturing Trajectories

For trajectory evaluation, your run function must capture tool calls during execution.

CRITICAL: Run output formats vary significantly by framework and agent type. You MUST inspect before implementing:

LangGraph agents (LangChain OSS): Use stream_mode="debug" with subgraphs=True to capture nested subagent tool calls.

import uuid

def run_agent_with_trajectory(agent, inputs: dict) -> dict:
    config = {"configurable": {"thread_id": f"eval-{uuid.uuid4()}"}}
    trajectory = []
    final_result = None

    for chunk in agent.stream(inputs, config=config, stream_mode="debug", subgraphs=True):
        # STEP 1: Print chunks to understand the structure
        print(f"DEBUG chunk: {chunk}")

        # STEP 2: Write extraction based on YOUR observed structure
        # ... your extraction logic here ...

    # IMPORTANT: After running, query the LangSmith trace to verify
    # your trajectory data is complete. Default output may be missing
    # tool calls that appear in the trace.
    return {"output": final_result, "trajectory": trajectory}

Custom / Non-LangChain Agents:

  1. Inspect output first - Run your agent and inspect the result structure. Trajectory data may already be included in the output (e.g., result.tool_calls, result.steps, etc.)
  2. Callbacks/Hooks - If your framework supports execution callbacks, register a hook that records tool names on each invocation
  3. Parse execution logs - As a last resort, extract tool names from structured logs or trace data

The key is to capture the tool name at execution time, not at definition time. </run_functions>

## Uploading Evaluators to LangSmith

IMPORTANT - Auto-Run Behavior: Evaluators uploaded to a dataset automatically run when you run experiments on that dataset. You do NOT need to pass them to evaluate() - just run your agent against the dataset and the uploaded evaluators execute automatically.

IMPORTANT - Local vs Uploaded: Uploaded evaluators run in a sandboxed environment with very limited package access. Only use built-in/standard library imports, and place all imports inside the evaluator function body. For dataset (offline) evaluators, prefer running locally with evaluate(evaluators=[...]) first — this gives you full package access.

IMPORTANT - Code vs Structured Evaluators:

  • Code evaluators (what the CLI uploads): Run in a limited environment without external packages. Use for deterministic logic (exact match, trajectory validation).
  • Structured evaluators (LLM-as-Judge): Configured via LangSmith UI, use a specific payload format with model/prompt/schema. The CLI does not support this format yet.

IMPORTANT - Choose the right target:

  • --dataset: Offline evaluator with (run, example) signature - for comparing to expected values
  • --project: Online evaluator with (run) signature - for real-time quality checks

You must specify one. Global evaluators are not supported.

# List all evaluators
langsmith evaluator list --api-key $LANGSMITH_API_KEY

# Upload offline evaluator (attached to dataset)
langsmith evaluator upload my_evaluators.py \
  --name "Trajectory Match" --function trajectory_evaluator \
  --dataset "My Dataset" --replace --api-key $LANGSMITH_API_KEY

# Upload online evaluator (attached to project)
langsmith evaluator upload my_evaluators.py \
  --name "Quality Check" --function quality_check \
  --project "Production Agent" --replace --api-key $LANGSMITH_API_KEY

# Delete
langsmith evaluator delete "Trajectory Match" --api-key $LANGSMITH_API_KEY

IMPORTANT - Safety Prompts:

  • The CLI prompts for confirmation before destructive operations
  • NEVER use --yes flag unless the user explicitly requests it

<best_practices>

  1. Use structured output for LLM judges - More reliable than parsing free-text
  2. Match evaluator to dataset type
    • Final Response → LLM as Judge for quality
    • Trajectory → Custom Code for sequence
  3. Use async for LLM judges - Enables parallel evaluation
  4. Test evaluators independently - Validate on known good/bad examples first
  5. Choose the right language
    • Python: Use for Python agents, langchain integrations
    • JavaScript: Use for TypeScript/Node.js agents </best_practices>

<running_evaluations>

Running Evaluations

Uploaded evaluators auto-run when you run experiments - no code needed. Local evaluators are passed directly for development/testing.

```python from langsmith import evaluate

Uploaded evaluators run automatically

results = evaluate(run_agent, data="My Dataset", experiment_prefix="eval-v1")

Or pass local evaluators for testing

results = evaluate(run_agent, data="My Dataset", evaluators=[my_evaluator], experiment_prefix="eval-v1")

</python>

<typescript>
```javascript
import { evaluate } from "langsmith/evaluation";

// Uploaded evaluators run automatically
const results = await evaluate(runAgent, {
  data: "My Dataset",
  experimentPrefix: "eval-v1",
});

// Or pass local evaluators for testing
const results = await evaluate(runAgent, {
  data: "My Dataset",
  evaluators: [myEvaluator],
  experimentPrefix: "eval-v1",
});

Rich Experiment Metadata

Pass metadata={...} to evaluate() to tag experiments with structured info. The reserved keys models, prompts, and tools auto-populate dedicated columns in the LangSmith experiments UI — making it easy to filter and compare runs by model, provider, prompt version, or tool surface. Any other keys are stored as free-form metadata.

```python EXPERIMENT_METADATA = { "models": ["openai:gpt-4o-mini"], "prompts": ["my-org/my-eval-prompt:abc12345"], "tools": [ { "name": "web_search", "description": "Search the web for information", "parameters": { "type": "object", "properties": {"query": {"type": "string"}}, "required": ["query"], }, }, ], }

results = evaluate( run_agent, data="My Dataset", evaluators=[my_evaluator], experiment_prefix="eval-v1", metadata=EXPERIMENT_METADATA, )

</python>

<typescript>
```javascript
const EXPERIMENT_METADATA = {
  models: ["openai:gpt-4o-mini"],
  prompts: ["my-org/my-eval-prompt:abc12345"],
  tools: [
    {
      name: "web_search",
      description: "Search the web for information",
      parameters: {
        type: "object",
        properties: { query: { type: "string" } },
        required: ["query"],
      },
    },
  ],
};

const results = await evaluate(runAgent, {
  data: "My Dataset",
  evaluators: [myEvaluator],
  experimentPrefix: "eval-v1",
  metadata: EXPERIMENT_METADATA,
});

Do not put secrets in metadata — it's persisted and displayed in the LangSmith UI. </running_evaluations>

## Common Issues

Output doesn't match what you expect: Query the LangSmith trace. It shows exact inputs/outputs at each step - compare what you find to what you're trying to extract.

One metric per evaluator: Return {"score": value, "comment": "..."}. For multiple metrics, create separate functions.

Field name mismatch: Your run function output must match dataset schema exactly. Inspect dataset first with client.read_example(example_id).

RunTree vs dict (Python only): Local evaluate() passes RunTree, uploaded evaluators receive dict. Handle both:

run_outputs = run.outputs if hasattr(run, "outputs") else run.get("outputs", {}) or {}

TypeScript always uses attribute access: run.outputs?.field

- [LangSmith Evaluation Concepts](https://docs.langchain.com/langsmith/evaluation-concepts) - [Custom Code Evaluators](https://changelog.langchain.com/announcements/custom-code-evaluators-in-langsmith) - [OpenEvals - Readymade Evaluators](https://github.com/langchain-ai/openevals)

langchain-aiのその他のスキル

langgraph-docs
langchain-ai
LangGraphのドキュメントにアクセスして、ステートフルなエージェントやマルチエージェントワークフローを構築できます。公式のLangGraph Pythonドキュメントを取得し、ステートマシン、グラフベースのエージェント設計、ヒューマンインザループパターンをカバーします。クエリの種類に応じて関連ドキュメントを優先します:ハウツー質問には実装ガイド、理論にはコンセプトページ、エンドツーエンドの例にはチュートリアル、技術詳細にはAPIリファレンスを提供します。自動的に2~4個の最も関連性の高いドキュメントURLを選択し、その内容を取得して回答します。
official
langgraph-human-in-the-loop
langchain-ai
グラフの実行を一時停止し、人間によるレビュー、承認、検証を経て、その入力を反映させて再開します。これには3つのコンポーネントが必要です:チェックポインター(InMemorySaverまたはPostgresSaver)、設定内のスレッドID、そしてJSONシリアライズ可能なインタラプトペイロードです。interrupt(value)は一時停止してデータを表示し、Command(resume=value)は再開してその値を一時停止したノードに返します。interrupt()より前のすべてのコードは再開時に再実行されるため、副作用は冪等である必要があります(insertではなくupsertを使用)。承認ワークフローをサポートします。
official
web-research
langchain-ai
このスキルはウェブリサーチに関連するリクエストに使用します。包括的なウェブリサーチを実施するための構造化されたアプローチを提供します。
official
langchain-oss-primer
langchain-ai
LangChain、Deep Agents、またはLangGraphエージェント構築プロジェクトでは、必ずここから始めてください。他のスキルを選択したり、何かを記述する前に必要な出発点です。
official
skill-creator
langchain-ai
エージェントの機能を専門知識、ワークフロー、ツール連携で拡張する効果的なスキルを作成するためのガイド。このスキルは、ユーザーが…のときに使用します。
official
social-media
langchain-ai
プラットフォーム固有のソーシャルメディア投稿を、調査に基づいたコンテンツと生成された補完画像とともに下書きします。LinkedInの投稿(1,300文字、プロフェッショナルなトーン)とTwitter/Xのスレッド(1ツイートあたり280文字、1/🧵形式)に対応。執筆前にサブエージェントに調査を委任し、その後調査結果を読み、正確性と関連性を確認します。generate_social_imageツールを使用して、小さな画面向けに最適化された大胆でコントラストの高い構図の、目を引くソーシャル画像を自動生成します。
official
deep-agents-memory
langchain-ai
Deep Agents向けのプラグイン可能なメモリおよびファイルバックエンド。エフェメラル、永続、ハイブリッドルーティングオプションを備えています。4種類のバックエンドタイプ:StateBackend(スレッドスコープ、エフェメラル)、StoreBackend(セッションをまたいだ永続)、FilesystemBackend(ローカル開発用の実際のディスクアクセス)、CompositeBackend(異なるパスを異なるバックエンドにルーティング)。FilesystemMiddlewareは6つのファイル操作ツールを提供:ls、read_file、write_file、edit_file、glob、grep。CompositeBackendは最長プレフィックス一致を使用してルーティングします...
official
deep-agents-orchestration
langchain-ai
サブエージェントを調整し、複数ステップのタスクを計画し、機密操作には人間の承認を必要とします。タスクツールを介して専門サブエージェントに作業を委任します。カスタムサブエージェントは独立したツールセットとシステムプロンプトをサポートし、デフォルトの「汎用」サブエージェントはメインエージェント設定を継承します。write_todosを使用して複雑なワークフローを計画・追跡し、保留中、進行中、完了済みの状態でタスクを整理します。呼び出し間での永続性のためにthread_idが必要です。実装...
official