Eval Engineering
LangChainOfficialPublished by LangChain
- Skill
- Workflow
- Agent tooling
- MIT
- Low risk
- Has scripts
AutoGineer summary
Written by AutoGineer from the skill’s own files, not by the author
Eval Engineering provides a structured, iterative methodology for developing and maintaining agent benchmarks. It guides the user through inspecting existing agent repositories and traces, designing grounded Task Specifications, building isolated execution environments, and implementing independent verifiers. The process emphasizes the creation of project-specific World Knowledge Skills to capture reusable patterns, ensuring that evaluation suites remain consistent, fair, and aligned with real-world agent behavior.
What it does
- Inspects agent repositories, traces, and existing evaluation suites to identify testing gaps.
- Drafts and reviews Task Specifications that define agent inputs, environment conditions, and scoring criteria.
- Builds and audits isolated Harbor-based environments for reproducible agent testing.
- Develops project-specific World Knowledge Skills to store reusable facts, scripts, and patterns.
- Implements independent verifiers to score agent performance and detect failures.
- Calibrates evaluation tasks by analyzing run trajectories and distinguishing between agent capability and infrastructure defects.
When to use it
- When designing new benchmarks for an agent or workflow.
- When existing evaluation tasks are brittle, leaking information, or failing due to environment issues.
- When you need to capture and reuse project-specific knowledge across multiple evaluation tasks.
- When you need to perform root-cause analysis on agent failures within a controlled environment.
Advantages
- Ensures evaluation tasks are grounded in actual repository evidence and real-world usage.
- Promotes consistency through the use of reusable World Knowledge Skills.
- Reduces false negatives by distinguishing between agent capability failures and infrastructure or verifier defects.
- Provides a clear, audit-ready structure for managing complex benchmark suites.
Usage examples
- “I need to create a new evaluation task for our customer support agent that tests its ability to handle multi-turn ticket escalations. How should I start?”
- The agent will guide you to first inspect existing traces of ticket escalations, review the current agent harness, and then draft a Task Spec that defines the escalation scenario, environment requirements, and success criteria.
- “Our current evaluation suite is failing frequently due to environment setup issues. How can I fix this?”
- The agent will help you audit the current Harbor configuration, verify environment isolation, and implement a more robust reset or replacement strategy for the test environment.
Install
Download the skill as a ZIP:
https://mp-staging.autogineer.com/agent-skills/langchain-ai/eval-engineering/downloadUnzip it into the cross-client skills folder of your project:
mkdir -p .agents/skills && unzip eval-engineering.zip -d .agents/skills
Documentation by LangChain
Eval Engineering
Flow
Inspect all inputs first: the repository, Harness, optional traces, existing Tasks and runs, existing World knowledge, and the human goal. Identify the source files and skill references that apply before proposing work.
Create or update the small project World Knowledge Skill from reusable facts in those inputs. Use it to propose one grounded Task.
Draft the Task Spec and World Skill together. Show both to the user, keep exact Task truth only in
Task.md, and refine both until the user approves them.Implement the approved Task, validate its Environment and Verifier, run the real Harness, inspect the full evidence, and fix only non-agent failures.
Reconcile the World Skill with what the run proved, then repeat this flow for the next Task.
Terms
Task Spec:
Task.md, which describes the input, relevant agent conditions, Environment, scoring, fairness, and open decisions for one Task.Task: the runnable instruction, Environment, and Verifier.
Harness: the complete agent Harbor runs, including prompts, model loop, tools, hooks, memory, sessions, and adapter.
Environment: the files, data, services, identity, permissions, network, clock, and mutable state around the Harness.
Verifier: independent checks that score the result or mark a run invalid.
World Knowledge Skill: a repository-local skill with reusable project-specific knowledge, references, scripts, assets, and tests that help generate Task Specs and build future Tasks.
Spec2Task: the full loop that turns a reviewed Task Spec into an audited runnable Task. Follow Task implementation for its concrete build order and reference routing.
Reference routing
Read each reference when its decision appears:
| Need | Read |
|---|---|
| Inspect source, traces, the Harness, dependencies, access, and existing evals | Discovery |
| Bootstrap or update reusable project knowledge | World knowledge |
| Propose Tasks and write the single Task Spec | Task design |
| Build data, services, access, state, and reset | Environment building |
| Create structured or natural-language data | Synthetic data |
| Define independent evidence and scoring | Verifier design |
| Apply Spec2Task to turn a reviewed Spec into an audited Task | Task implementation |
| Compare model runs and classify failures | Calibration |
| Package and run Harbor tasks | Harbor |
| Adapt a known benchmark design | Benchmark patterns |
| Build multi-turn conversations | Multi-turn simulation |
| See World knowledge learned across two Tasks | Service-desk example |
Reusable implementation resources:
Multi-turn runner, model user, and Harbor adapter example
Tool-schema comparison, which compares supplied schema fragments but does not resolve external
$reftargets
1. Inspect inputs and existing World knowledge
Review every input the user provides before proposing a Task. Use the guidance that matches each available input:
For a repository, Harness, traces, or dependencies, read Discovery.
For existing Tasks and runs, inspect their instructions, Environments, Verifiers, rewards, trajectories, and final state. Read Calibration when run quality or failure causes affect the new design.
For an existing project World Skill, read World knowledge, then check the sources and reusable methods that affect the new Task.
For human goals and constraints, read Task design.
For relevant benchmark examples, use the domain index and source callouts in Benchmark patterns.
Inspect the repository before asking questions that source and tests can answer. Follow the active Harness through prompts, models, tools, services, state, effects, and focused tests. Inspect existing Task instructions, parsers, Verifiers, reward paths, and run evidence.
If the user supplies traces, review complete runs or threads. Use traces to learn real requests, dependency behavior, state shapes, errors, and failure conditions. Do not treat a trace answer as independent truth.
If .agents/skills/<project>-world/SKILL.md exists, read it. Follow its routing
only for knowledge relevant to the current Task. Check cited repository paths,
commands, and scripts when their accuracy affects the design.
2. Propose and select a Task
Read Task design and use the index in Benchmark patterns to find the relevant domain and source callouts. Focus on that domain unless the Task crosses another one. In the first user-facing design response after inspection, propose one Task grounded in repository evidence, supplied traces, existing coverage, or a human priority. State:
the real work and capability;
the condition that makes the case non-trivial;
the Environment and independent evidence it needs;
the important failure it can detect;
how it differs from existing Tasks; and
the main open decision.
In the same response, show the relevant current World Skill content and the specific additions or corrections this Task suggests. If no World Skill exists, show the small initial contents that will help create this Task and future Tasks. Keep the Task's exact request, focal records, expected result, hidden truth, and exact scoring rules out of the World Skill.
Let the user revise the Task proposal and World knowledge together before implementation. Offer alternatives only when a real user choice changes the design.
3. Write and review the Task Spec and World Skill
Copy the Task template to
evals/<suite>/tasks/<task-id>/Task.md. Put all Task-specific design in this
one file. At the same time, create or update the project World Skill by
following World knowledge. Determine the
project skill location supported by the active agent and repository.
.agents/skills/<project>-world/SKILL.md and
.claude/skills/<project>-world/SKILL.md are common landing spots. Follow an
established project convention when one exists. Otherwise, explain the proposed
location and get user confirmation before creating the skill. Start from
the World Skill template when needed.
Keep each Task.md beside the Harbor task it describes:
evals/<suite>/tasks/<task-id>/
├── Task.md # human-reviewed control-plane spec
├── task.toml # required Harbor configuration
├── instruction.md # required agent input
├── environment/ # required Environment definition and visible state
│ ├── Dockerfile # use this or docker-compose.yaml
│ └── docker-compose.yaml # optional; primary service must be main
├── tests/
│ ├── test.sh # required Harbor Verifier entry point
│ ├── test_*.py # optional Verifier helpers
│ └── fixtures/ # optional hidden Verifier data
└── solution/
└── solve.sh # optional reference pathNever copy or mount Task.md into the evaluated agent's workspace or image.
The agent receives instruction.md and only the Environment state intended for
the run.
Include:
purpose and source evidence;
exact input and later turns;
only the Harness conditions relevant to this Task;
initial state, services, access, visibility, reset, and production differences;
required results, prohibited effects, accepted alternatives, and independent Verifier evidence;
fairness, leakage risks, and invalid-run conditions; and
open decisions and assumptions.
Show the full Task Spec and the World Skill changes to the user. Explain what
is already in the World Skill, what this Task adds or corrects, and what stays
only in Task.md. Revise both through the same back-and-forth. Mark the Task
Spec approved only after explicit approval. Treat World Skill changes as
accepted only after the user reviews them. If the user requests an end-to-end
build without an approval pause, continue with an agent-reviewed
Status: Draft and label the World Skill changes as unreviewed.
If implementation changes the request, visible information, material
Environment behavior, or scoring boundary, update Task.md and show the
change. Set its status back to Draft. Show the diff and require explicit
reapproval before setting it to Approved again.
4. Apply Spec2Task
Follow Task implementation. It gives the build order and routes each decision to the Environment, synthetic-data, Verifier, Harbor, and calibration references.
For an existing project, use its pinned or supported Harbor version. Otherwise, use the installed supported version and record it. Upgrade only with user approval and a stated compatibility reason. Use the installed CLI help as the command contract.
Before a scored model run:
Confirm the model, trial count, judge, timeout, and maximum expected cost with the user unless the user already authorized that run plan.
Complete the package audit in Harbor. Confirm every required file, entry point, path, permission, configuration value, mount, service, and reward output needed for this exact Task is present and works through Harbor. Confirm hidden Task, Verifier, solution, and secret material is absent from the agent-visible image and workspace.
Check setup and trial isolation in the way that fits the Environment. A fresh container or worktree can provide isolation by replacement. A reused mutable service needs a checked reset. Immutable frozen data needs only a checked load. See Task implementation.
Exercise every operation the Task depends on.
Run the reference path when one exists.
Test the Verifier with a clear valid result, a valid alternative, a realistic wrong result, a shortcut, a prohibited collateral change, and missing or corrupt evidence.
Confirm every completed Verifier path writes a valid reward and useful evidence without exposing hidden truth or secrets.
5. Run and audit
Run the actual Harness through Harbor. Read the complete trajectory, not only the reward. Inspect:
messages, model calls, tool calls, results, retries, and errors;
initial and final Environment state and external effects;
service, setup, readiness, reset, and cleanup evidence;
each Verifier criterion, its evidence, decision, and error; and
the resolved Harness, model, Environment, and judge configuration.
Classify each unsuccessful run as an agent capability failure, missing information, Harness defect, Environment defect, Verifier false rejection, Verifier false acceptance, leakage, or infrastructure failure. Fix non-agent failures before using the score.
Model comparison is an optional calibration strategy, not a completion rule. When it would answer a real uncertainty, compare a weaker model, the target model, or a stronger model and repeat trials when behavior is variable. Read every selected trace. Contrast can expose unclear inputs, brittle setup, leakage, shortcuts, or reward hacks. Pass rates and model ordering do not prove Task quality.
Read Calibration for the complete audit method.
6. Reconcile project World knowledge
Use World knowledge throughout Task design, implementation, and audit. Add or correct project-specific knowledge when the work supplies evidence that would help another Task. This can include Task patterns, Environment methods, data creation, Verifier evidence, run procedures, scripts, assets, and examples.
After the audit, reconcile the World Skill with what the completed Task proved. Show the user:
the proposed reusable knowledge;
the evidence supporting it;
how another Task would use it;
where it should live; and
what remains specific to the completed Task.
Remove or narrow ideas that the Task disproved. If the user asked for autonomous end-to-end updates without a pause, make the smallest supported update, show it in the final review, and do not imply that the human approved the generalization.
Create only SKILL.md at first. Add references/, scripts/, assets/, or
tests/ only when their real contents justify them.
Keep the completed Task's request, focal state, expected result, and exact
criteria in its collocated Task.md. Do not copy broad guidance that is already
clear in this skill. Record the project-specific adaptation of that guidance.
7. Repeat
Use Tasks two and three to test the World Skill. Check whether it reduces rediscovery, improves Task Specs, preserves important relationships, reuses a proven operation, or prevents a known Verifier defect. Correct rules that are missing, stale, or too broad.
When several materially different Tasks have exercised the shared knowledge and the construction and verification methods are clear, the next cycle can propose several independent Task Specs:
Mine new repository, trace, and human evidence.
Use the World Skill to generate distinct Task Specs.
Have the human review the specs.
Build independent approved Tasks in parallel.
Audit every Task individually.
Update World knowledge only with reusable corrections.
Continue this loop as production behavior, user priorities, agents, and models change.
Dependencies, access, and safety
Map required systems, data, roles, network needs, and safe setup methods. Never read, print, copy, store, or ask the human to paste secret values. Tell the human what dependency is needed, why it is needed, and how the project expects access to be provided. Default to controlled local, frozen, or simulated dependencies. Never write to production during an eval. Treat access, startup, reset, timeout, judge, and Verifier failures as invalid runs, not failed agent work.
Complete only when
Task.mdmatches the built instruction, Environment, and Verifier.The Task is solvable from agent-visible or normally discoverable information.
The Environment starts reliably and isolates trials by replacement, reset, or immutable state as appropriate, without leaking hidden truth.
Valid and invalid Verifier cases behave as intended.
At least one real Harness run was read in full.
Non-agent failures were repaired or reported as unresolved limits.
Model comparison, when used, includes trace review rather than pass rates alone.
The project World Skill was created or updated with the Task Spec, reviewed during the work, and reconciled with the final evidence.
The user receives the Task path, run command, results, evidence, and remaining limits.
Files
- ATTRIBUTION.mdAdded by AutoGineer894 B
- LICENSELicence file added by AutoGineer1.0 KiB
- SKILL.md15.6 KiB
- agents/openai.yaml378 B
- assets/task/Task.md.template1.8 KiB
- assets/world-skill/SKILL.md.template2.9 KiB
- references/calibration.md3.1 KiB
- references/discovery.md12.1 KiB
- references/environment-building.md4.0 KiB
- references/examples/service-desk.md2.9 KiB
- references/harbor.md6.8 KiB
- references/multi-turn-simulation/guide.md5.1 KiB
- references/multi-turn-simulation/harbor_example.pyScript10.0 KiB
- references/multi-turn-simulation/model_user.pyScript5.0 KiB
- references/multi-turn-simulation/runner.pyScript7.0 KiB
- references/patterns.md36.8 KiB
- references/synthetic-data.md2.9 KiB
- references/task-design.md5.5 KiB
- references/task-implementation.md8.2 KiB
- references/verifier-design.md3.0 KiB
- references/world-knowledge.md11.3 KiB
- scripts/compare_tool_schemas.pyScript13.8 KiB
- scripts/snapshot_sqlite_state.pyScript5.2 KiB
references/task-design.md
Design and Review One Task Spec
Sections
Find directions
Select one Task
Write the Task Spec
Review the Task and World Skill with the human
Build a family
Find directions
Use repository capabilities, supplied traces, user priorities, production failures, existing eval coverage, and project World knowledge. Start with real work and an observable result. Do not create a Task only because an unusual fixture is available.
Propose one grounded Task in the first user-facing design response after inspection. Use any concise structure that shows the work and capability, non-trivial condition, important failure, Environment and access, independent Verifier evidence, difference from existing Tasks, source evidence, and open decisions. Offer alternatives only when a real user choice changes the design.
In the same response, show relevant knowledge already in the project World Skill and the reusable additions or corrections suggested by the Task. If the skill does not exist, show the small initial content that will support this Task and future Tasks. Frequency in traces can support relevance but does not prove business priority. A repository feature can support feasibility but does not prove the Task is valuable.
Select one Task
A strong Task:
represents useful work;
requires the selected capability;
is solvable from visible information or normal discovery;
contains a realistic reason the agent can fail;
produces independently observable evidence;
accepts materially equivalent results;
checks harmful side effects;
avoids hidden trivia and answer leakage; and
differs from existing Tasks by condition, state, evidence, or failure mode.
Reject a Task that mainly tests prompt decoding, brittle formatting, infrastructure luck, impossible knowledge, or a preferred internal tool sequence.
Use normal request language. State the goal, necessary context, expected output or effect, and real limits. Do not prescribe steps unless the procedure is the capability.
Write the Task Spec
Copy assets/task/Task.md.template into the runnable Task directory beside
task.toml. Keep it outside the agent-visible image and workspace. Create or
update .agents/skills/<project>-world/SKILL.md in the same design loop by
following World knowledge.
Purpose and evidence
Name the work, capability, value, source, and difference from existing Tasks. Use paths, symbols, focused tests, trace IDs, policies, or human decisions for important claims.
Agent input
Write the exact initial instruction and any later turns or triggers. State
context passed outside the instruction. The generated instruction.md must
match either the approved input or the reviewed Draft input used under the
documented no-pause exception.
Relevant agent conditions
Include only Harness behavior this Task depends on: tool interfaces, session persistence, time, retries, or reconstruction differences. Do not repeat a complete repository map in every Task.
Environment
Describe initial state, relationships, visible and hidden information, dependencies, access, identity, permissions, time, network, setup, readiness, reset, and material production differences. Cite project World knowledge used by the design.
Verification
For each required or prohibited result, state independent evidence, the exact objective check or bounded semantic question, and its pass condition. List accepted alternatives, the complete pass rule, and invalid-run conditions.
Fairness and leakage
Explain why the Task is solvable, how the agent can find required information, which shortcuts might work, and how hidden truth stays inaccessible. Name a realistic wrong result and a collateral change that must fail.
Review the Task and World Skill with the human
Show the full Task Spec and World Skill changes before building by default.
Explain what already existed, what the current Task adds or corrects, and what
stays only in Task.md. Let the human revise both. Ask the human to review:
whether the work and failure matter;
whether the request is realistic;
whether the Environment contains enough and only appropriate information;
whether live, frozen, and simulated choices are acceptable;
whether the evidence measures the intended outcome;
whether valid alternatives are allowed;
whether prohibited effects are complete; and
whether cost, access, privacy, and safety are acceptable.
Mark Status: Approved only after explicit approval. If the user requested a
full build without another pause, continue with a Draft and label it honestly.
Treat World Skill changes as accepted only after human review.
After implementation, ask for evidence review. Show representative trajectories, final state, Verifier evidence, defects found, revisions made, results, and remaining limits. A reviewed markdown design does not prove a good runnable Task.
Build a family
Prove one Task before creating a family. Then vary one meaningful condition:
longer or conflicting history;
similar identities;
missing or stale information;
permission or policy boundary;
required clarification;
multiple valid outcomes;
delayed or concurrent state;
partial failure or retry; or
greater collateral-change risk.
Keep the underlying work stable when comparing difficulty. Avoid shallow instruction rewrites. Update project World knowledge when a new condition reveals a reusable rule, builder, evidence source, or known failure.
Requirements and compatibility
Works with: Claude Code, Claude apps, OpenAI Codex, GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Gemini CLI, Kiro, OpenCode, Goose, Amp, Roo Code, JetBrains Junie, Factory Droid, Devin (ex-Windsurf), Mistral Vibe, OpenHands, Letta
“Works with” means the tool reads the open Agent Skills format; a skill written for one tool may use features others lack.
Needs: Needs Python
Security
What our scanner noticed· Low risk
- Scripts that your agent may run
This skill includes scripts that your agent may run. Read them before you use it.
A static scan is not a guarantee. Skills are third-party content: review a skill before you let an agent use it.
Attribution and licence
- Published by
- LangChain
- Publisher
- LangChain (Official)
- Source
- langchain-ai/langchain-skills · config/skills/eval-engineering · commit 126c384
- Licence
- MIT License (redistribution allowed)
- LICENSE (added by AutoGineer from LICENSE)
- ATTRIBUTION.md (written by AutoGineer)
- Synced
AutoGineer is not affiliated with or endorsed by LangChain.
Download ZIP
The ZIP holds the skill’s files, its licence files and an ATTRIBUTION.md. Download eval-engineering.zip