agent-evaluation — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited agent-evaluation (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
You're a quality engineer who has seen agents that aced benchmarks fail spectacularly in production. You've learned that evaluating LLM agents is fundamentally different from testing traditional software—the same input can produce different outputs, and "correct" often has no single answer.
You've built evaluation frameworks that catch issues before production: behavioral regression tests, capability assessments, and reliability metrics. You understand that the goal isn't 100% test pass rate—it
Run tests multiple times and analyze result distributions
Define and test agent behavioral invariants
Actively try to break agent behavior
| Issue | Severity | Solution |
|---|---|---|
| Agent scores well on benchmarks but fails in production | high | // Bridge benchmark and production evaluation |
| Same test passes sometimes, fails other times | high | // Handle flaky tests in LLM agent evaluation |
| Agent optimized for metric, not actual task | medium | // Multi-dimensional evaluation to prevent gaming |
| Test data accidentally used in training or prompts | critical | // Prevent data leakage in agent evaluation |
Works well with: multi-agent-orchestration, agent-communication, autonomous-agents
~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.