智能体工作流

write-judge-prompt

hamelsmu/evals-skills

Design LLM-as-Judge evaluators for subjective criteria that code-based checks cannot handle. Use when a failure mode requires interpretation (tone, faithfulness, relevance, completeness). Do NOT use when the failure mode can be checked with code (regex, schema validation, execution tests). Do NOT use when you need to validate or calibrate the judge — use validate-evaluator instead.

  • 808 次安装
  • 1700 星标
  • 收录于

安装命令

npx skills add https://github.com/hamelsmu/evals-skills --skill write-judge-prompt

SKILL.md

Write LLM-as-Judge Prompt

Design a binary Pass/Fail LLM-as-Judge evaluator for one specific failure mode. Each judge checks exactly one thing.

Prerequisites

  • Error analysis is complete. The failure mode is identified.
  • You have human-labeled traces for this failure mode (at least 20 Pass and 20 Fail examples).
  • A code-based evaluator cannot check this failure mode. Exhaust code-based options before reaching for a judge — many failure modes that seem subjective reduce to keyword checks, regex, or API calls when you understand the domain. Example: detecting whether an AI interviewing coach suggests "general" questions (asking about typical behavior instead of a specific past event) seems to require semantic understanding, but in practice a keyword check for words like "usually," "typical," and "normally" could work quite well.

The Four Components

Every judge prompt requires exactly four components:

1. Task and Evaluation Criterion

State what the judge evaluates. One failure mode per judge.