eval-engineering

作者: langchain-ai

Iteratively inspect an agent repository and optional user-provided traces, interview the user, and create, run, and audit Harbor evals one at a time. Use for…

npx skills add https://github.com/langchain-ai/langchain-skills --skill eval-engineering

Eval Engineering

Work with the user to define, build, run, and audit Harbor tasks.

map harness + environment -> propose directions -> user chooses
-> draft specs -> user approves -> build + run + audit -> repeat

Use the latest Harbor release. Put task source under evals/. Build sequentially while a later task depends on an unproven Harness, Environment, or Verifier. Build independent tasks in parallel when the user requests it.

Boundaries

  • Task: instruction.md plus an Environment and Verifier.
  • Harness: the complete agent Harbor runs: model, prompts, loop, repository-defined tools, middleware/hooks, memory/session behavior, and Harbor adapter. Harbor calls this the Agent.
  • Environment: the container/world around the Harness: OS, files, backing data, services, identity, permissions, network, clock, and mutable state.
  • Verifier: the test script that independently scores final artifacts or resulting Environment state; it uses trajectory only when final state cannot provide the required evidence.

Repository-defined tool code belongs to the Harness. The data or service behind it belongs to the Environment. Example: a docs agent's search_docs definition and result parsing stay in the Harness; the frozen search index and its error behavior live in the Environment. If production supplies a tool server dynamically, keep that server in the Environment and preserve how the Harness discovers and calls it.

Score the requested outcome

  • For stateful work, score independently observed final Environment state first. Example: a booking exists for the requested room and no conflicting booking exists.
  • Keep ATIF as diagnostic evidence by default. Use trajectory or session evidence only when final state cannot establish the requirement, such as proving later user turns used the same session.
  • Do not require a tool name, subagent, retry count, exact number of updates, or exact wording unless that is the user-facing requirement.
  • Before building, state what the agent can see, the required user-visible outcome, prohibited effects, and materially equivalent outcomes that must pass. Do not score a hidden evaluator preference.

References

Read each reference when its decision appears:

  • Trace sourcing: select and analyze traces only when the user supplies a source.
  • Harness: identify the actual agent Harbor will run and preserve its behavior.
  • Task design: turn one selected capability into a judgeable request.
  • Environment building: choose live, frozen, or simulated backing data and services.
  • Multi-turn simulation: run scripted or LLM-generated user turns through one Harness session.
  • Verifier design: define independent evidence, scoring, and calibration.
  • Harbor: create, run, and inspect the Harbor task.

1. Map the Harness and production Environment

Start at the public agent entrypoint and follow reachable code.

Harness: entrypoint; prompts; models; loop; routing; retries; hooks; memory;
         repository-defined tools, inputs, outputs, and effects
Environment: files; records; indexes; services behind tools; identity;
             permissions; network; time; mutable state
Purpose: intended users, jobs, and useful outcomes
Evidence: tests, fixtures, issues, existing evals, and documented failures

Do not start services, install packages, or use credentials during mapping. Explain the map in the conversation and ask only what code cannot answer, such as “Which user job matters most?” or “What failure must this eval catch?”

If the user provides traces, read Trace sourcing. Use trace evidence only when it changes an eval direction, dependency behavior, realistic request, or failure case. Never treat the recorded answer as truth.

2. Propose eval directions

Offer two or three capabilities grounded in the map and any supplied traces:

Name: choose the correct account lookup
Example request: “What plan is account A on?”
Tests: looks up A, uses the returned plan, and does not invent account details
Needs: known account records behind the existing read-only lookup

Recommend one and explain why. The user chooses before implementation.

3. Draft and approve the specs

Read the Harness, task, Environment, and Verifier references. After the user chooses a direction, write:

evals/<task-id>/
├── harness.md
├── environment.md
└── task.md

These are control-plane review files beside the runnable task. Never copy or mount them into the Harness workspace or task image. task.md is the review spec; Harbor's instruction.md is the Harness-visible request created from the approved spec.

  • harness.md: entrypoint, preserved behavior, adapter, sessions, credentials, recorded evidence, and reconstruction differences.
  • environment.md: live/frozen/simulated dependencies, backend contracts, generated or copied data, schemas and relationships, storage, effects, reset, and fidelity limits.
  • task.md: capability, request, initial conditions, pass condition, Verifier evidence, and accepted alternatives.

For each dependency, recommend live, frozen, or simulated use. Read-only, low-cost services backed by hard-to-reproduce data are strong live candidates. Stable copied data is a strong frozen candidate. Writes, unstable services, and resettable state are strong simulation candidates. State required credential names for live use.

Print the full contents of all three specs in the terminal, keeping them concise. Show their paths and your recommendation, then ask the user to approve or revise them. Mark each spec approved only after explicit user approval. Do not build the Harbor task until all three are approved. If user feedback or implementation changes the request, Harness, Environment, or Verifier boundary, update the affected spec, show the change, and obtain approval again.

For multiple user turns, prefer fixed follow-ups when they do not depend on Harness responses. Use an LLM user only when replies must react, correct, reject, or stop; read the multi-turn reference and include simulator credentials in the proposal.

4. Build one Harbor task

evals/<task-id>/
├── task.toml
├── instruction.md
├── task.md
├── harness.md
├── environment.md
├── environment/
└── tests/

Use the approved Harness unchanged when possible. Add an adapter only when Harbor needs one to invoke it. Do not expose hidden truth, simulator instructions, verifier criteria, or judge credentials to the Harness.

Prefer programmatic checks for final state, artifacts, tests, and independently recomputed facts. Use an LLM judge only for meaning code cannot reasonably decide. Run deterministic checks before the judge; give the judge only the final artifact and independent evidence for that unresolved semantic question. Emit one primary reward.

5. Run and audit

Calibrate the Verifier with realistic cases from supplied traces, prior eval runs, or production-like task variants: a valid paraphrase, a plausible wrong result, and any known boundary case. Run them through the same Verifier command Harbor uses. Run the Harness through Harbor, then inspect:

  • Harness-recorded messages, model/tool calls, results, retries, and errors;
  • Environment-observed service results, initial/final state, and reset;
  • Verifier evidence, decision, reason, reward, and errors;
  • resolved Harness and Environment configuration.

For every zero reward, classify the evidence as a fair agent failure, Verifier defect, Environment defect or leak, or infrastructure error. Fix and rerun non-agent failures before treating them as evaluation results. If the Environment leaked the answer, a wrong answer passed, or a valid result failed, the eval is not complete.

For an LLM user, inspect representative correct, wrong, clarification, and stop paths. Revise its contract or model when its replies are implausible. Simulator termination is not success; the Verifier alone assigns reward.

6. Review and repeat

Explain the task path and exact Harbor command, request, Harness, Environment, run behavior, Verifier decision, and main limitation. Completion requires a real Harbor run, evidence that the Verifier measured the intended capability, and user approval. If continuing, reuse the available evidence and propose a distinct capability.

Invariants

  • One capability per Harbor task.
  • No production writes; reset mutable state between trials.
  • Keep hidden truth and simulator/judge credentials unavailable to the Harness.
  • Treat build, credential, reset, timeout, judge, and Verifier failures as infrastructure errors, not failed agent work.

来自 langchain-ai 的更多技能

langgraph-docs
langchain-ai
访问LangGraph文档,构建有状态代理和多代理工作流。获取官方LangGraph Python文档,涵盖状态机、基于图的代理设计以及人机协同模式。根据查询类型优先提供相关文档:实现指南解答操作问题,概念页面讲解理论,教程提供端到端示例,API参考提供技术细节。自动选择2–4个最相关的文档URL并检索其内容以回答...
official
langgraph-human-in-the-loop
langchain-ai
暂停图执行以进行人工审查、批准或验证,随后根据其输入恢复执行。需要三个组件:检查点存储器(InMemorySaver 或 PostgresSaver)、配置中的线程 ID 以及 JSON 可序列化的中断负载。interrupt(value) 暂停执行并展示数据;Command(resume=value) 恢复执行并将该值返回给暂停的节点。恢复时,interrupt() 之前的所有代码会重新执行,因此副作用必须具有幂等性(使用 upsert 而非 insert)。支持审批工作流,...
official
web-research
langchain-ai
用于处理与网络研究相关的请求;它提供了一种结构化的方法来进行全面的网络研究
official
langchain-oss-primer
langchain-ai
任何LangChain、Deep Agents或LangGraph代理构建项目都请始终从这里开始。在选择其他技能或编写任何内容之前,这是必需的起点。
official
skill-creator
langchain-ai
创建有效技能的指南,通过专业知识、工作流程或工具集成来扩展代理能力。当用户……时使用此技能。
official
social-media
langchain-ai
根据研究内容起草特定平台的社交媒体帖子,并生成配套图片。支持领英帖子(1300字符,专业语气)和推特/X话题(每条推文280字符,采用1/🧵格式)。需在撰写前将研究任务委托给子代理,随后阅读研究结果以确保准确性和相关性。使用generate_social_image工具自动生成引人注目的社交图片,采用粗体高对比度构图,针对小屏幕进行优化...
official
deep-agents-memory
langchain-ai
为Deep Agents提供可插拔的内存与文件后端,支持临时、持久化和混合路由选项。四种后端类型:StateBackend(线程作用域,临时)、StoreBackend(跨会话持久化)、FilesystemBackend(本地开发时真实磁盘访问)和CompositeBackend(将不同路径路由到不同后端)。FilesystemMiddleware提供六种文件操作工具:ls、read_file、write_file、edit_file、glob、grep。CompositeBackend使用最长前缀匹配进行路由...
official
deep-agents-orchestration
langchain-ai
编排子代理,规划多步骤任务,并对敏感操作要求人工审批。通过任务工具将工作委派给专业子代理;自定义子代理支持独立的工具集和系统提示,而默认的“通用”子代理继承主代理配置。使用write_todos规划并跟踪复杂工作流,将任务组织为待处理、进行中和已完成状态;需要thread_id以实现跨调用的持久化。实现...
official