SECURITY REVIEW
Not yet assessed
Review the original instructions and requested permissions before installing.
No security review is available for this catalog entry yet.
Evaluates and ranks AgentHub agent results using metrics or an LLM judge.
Evaluate and rank agent results by metric or LLM judge for an AgentHub session. Use when the user runs /hub:eval or asks to score, compare, or pick a winner among completed AgentHub agents.
Review the original instructions and requested permissions before installing.
No security review is available for this catalog entry yet.
How clearly the skill guides your agent, how complete its workflow is, and how you can check the outcome.
No quality assessment is available for this catalog entry yet.
Original instructions from the publisher’s SKILL.md
# /hub:eval — Evaluate Agent Results
Rank all agent results for a session. Supports metric-based evaluation (run a command), LLM judge (compare diffs), or hybrid.
## Usage
```
/hub:eval # Eval latest session using configured criteria
/hub:eval 20260317-143022 # Eval specific session
/hub:eval --judge # Force LLM judge mode (ignore metric config)
```
## What It Does
### Metric Mode (eval command configured)
Run the evaluation command in each agent's worktree:
```bash
python {skill_path}/scripts/result_ranker.py \
--session {session-id} \
--eval-cmd "{eval_cmd}" \
--metric {metric} --direction {direction}
```
Output:
```
RANK AGENT METRIC DELTA FILES
1 agent-2 142ms -38ms 2
2 agent-1 165ms -15ms 3
3 agent-3 190ms +10ms 1
Winner: agent-2 (142ms)
```
### LLM Judge Mode (no eval command, or --judge flag)
For each agent:
1. Get the diff: `git diff {base_branch}...{agent_branch}`
2. Read the agent's result post from `.agenthub/board/results/agent-{i}-result.md`
3. Compare all diffs and rank by:
- **Correctness** — Does it solve the task?
- **Simplicity** — Fewer lines changed is better (when equal correctness)
- **Quality** — Clean execution, good structure, no regressions
Present rankings with justification.
Example LLM judge output for a content task:
```
RANK AGENT VERDICT WORD COUNT
1 agent-1 Strong narrative, clear CTA 1480
2 agent-3 Good data points, weak intro 1520
3 agent-2 Generic tone, no differentiation 1350
Winner: agent-1 (strongest narrative arc and call-to-action)
```
### Hybrid Mode
1. Run metric evaluation first
2. If top agents are within 10% of each other, use LLM judge to break ties
3. Present both metric and qualitative rankings
## After Eval
1. Update session state:
```bash
python {skill_path}/scripts/session_manager.py --update {session-id} --state evaluating
```
2. Tell the user:
- Ranked results with winner highlighted
- Next step: `/hub:merge` to merge the winner
- Or `/hub:merge {session-id} --agent {winner}` to be explicit