eval-engineering

作者: langchain-ai

反覆檢查 agent 儲存庫與使用者提供的可選追蹤資料,訪談使用者,並逐一建立、執行及稽核 Harbor evals。用於……

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.

來自 langchain-ai 的更多技能

langgraph-docs
langchain-ai
存取 LangGraph 文件以建構具狀態代理與多代理工作流程。擷取官方 LangGraph Python 文件,涵蓋狀態機、基於圖形的代理設計及人機協作模式。根據查詢類型優先提供相關文件:實作指南用於操作問題、概念頁面用於理論、教學用於端到端範例、API 參考用於技術細節。自動選取 2 至 4 個最相關的文件 URL 並擷取內容以回答...
official
langgraph-human-in-the-loop
langchain-ai
暫停圖形執行以進行人工審查、批准或驗證,然後根據其輸入繼續執行。需要三個組件:檢查點儲存器(InMemorySaver 或 PostgresSaver)、配置中的執行緒 ID,以及可序列化為 JSON 的中斷負載。interrupt(value) 會暫停並顯示資料;Command(resume=value) 會繼續執行,並將該值返回給暫停的節點。所有 interrupt() 之前的程式碼在恢復時會重新執行,因此副作用必須是冪等的(使用 upsert,而非 insert)。支援審批工作流程,...
official
web-research
langchain-ai
使用此技能處理與網路研究相關的請求;它提供了一種結構化方法來進行全面的網路研究
official
langchain-oss-primer
langchain-ai
務必從此處開始任何 LangChain、Deep Agents 或 Lang
official
skill-creator
langchain-ai
建立有效技能的指南,透過專業知識、工作流程或工具整合來擴展代理功能。當使用者…時,請使用此技能。
official
social-media
langchain-ai
根據研究內容撰寫特定平台的社群媒體貼文,並生成搭配圖片。支援LinkedIn貼文(1,300字元,專業語氣)與Twitter/X推文串(每則280字元,採用1/🧵格式)。寫作前需將研究任務委派給子代理,並閱讀其發現以確保準確性與相關性。使用generate_social_image工具自動生成吸睛的社群圖片,採用大膽高對比構圖,針對小螢幕進行優化。
official
deep-agents-memory
langchain-ai
為Deep Agents提供可插拔的記憶體與檔案後端,支援短暫、持久及混合路由選項。四種後端類型:StateBackend(執行緒範圍內短暫)、StoreBackend(跨工作階段持久)、FilesystemBackend(本地開發的真實磁碟存取)及CompositeBackend(將不同路徑路由至不同後端)。FilesystemMiddleware提供六種檔案操作工具:ls、read_file、write_file、edit_file、glob、grep。CompositeBackend使用最長前綴匹配進行路由...
official
deep-agents-orchestration
langchain-ai
協調子代理、規劃多步驟任務,並在敏感操作時要求人類批准。透過任務工具將工作委派給專業子代理;自訂子代理支援隔離的工具集與系統提示,而預設的「通用」子代理則繼承主代理配置。使用 write_todos 規劃與追蹤複雜工作流程,將任務組織為待處理、進行中與已完成狀態;需提供 thread_id 以在多次調用間保持持續性。實作...
official