Iterative evaluation and refinement patterns for improving AI agent outputs through self-critique loops.
Works with
Provides three core patterns: basic reflection (self-critique loops), evaluator-optimizer (separated generation and evaluation), and code-specific test-driven refinement
Supports multiple evaluation strategies including outcome-based assessment, LLM-as-judge comparison, and rubric-based scoring with weighted dimensions
Includes practical Python implementations with structured JSON
AI-first code editor with Composer
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
node --versionagentic-evalExecute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
Fetches agentic-eval from github/awesome-copilot and configures it for Cursor.
The CLI shows a list of agents. Use arrow keys and space to select Cursor:
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Restart Cursor to activate agentic-eval. Access via /agentic-eval in your agent's command palette.
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your environment. Always review source, verify the publisher, and test in isolation before production.
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Create detailed user stories, acceptance criteria, and feature specs
Example
Generate user stories for 'password reset feature' with acceptance criteria, edge cases, and test scenarios
Reduce spec writing time by 50%, ensure comprehensive coverage
Research competitors, compare features, identify gaps
Example
Analyze 5 competitor products, create feature comparison matrix, suggest differentiation opportunities
Complete competitive research in 2 hours instead of 2 days
Evaluate features using frameworks (RICE, ICE, Kano) and create prioritized backlogs
Example
Score 20 feature ideas using RICE framework, generate prioritized roadmap with rationale
2
total installs
2
this week
28.7K
GitHub stars
0
upvotes
Run in your terminal
2
installs
2
this week
28.7K
stars
Patterns for self-improvement through iterative evaluation and refinement.
Evaluation patterns enable agents to assess and improve their own outputs, moving beyond single-shot generation to iterative refinement loops.
Generate → Evaluate → Critique → Refine → Output
↑ │
└──────────────────────────────┘
Agent evaluates and improves its own output through self-critique.
def reflect_and_refine(task: str, criteria: list[str], max_iterations: int = 3) -> str:
"""Generate with reflection loop."""
output = llm(f"Complete this task:\n{task}")
for i in range(max_iterations):
# Self-critique
critique = llm(f"""
Evaluate this output against criteria: {criteria}
Output: {output}
Rate each: PASS/FAIL with feedback as JSON.
""")
critique_data = json.loads(critique)
all_pass = all(c["status"] == "PASS" for c in critique_data.values())
if all_pass:
return output
# Refine based on critique
failed = {k: v["feedback"] for k, v in critique_data.items() if v["status"] == "FAIL"}
output = llm(f"Improve to address: {failed}\nOriginal: {output}")
return output
Key insight: Use structured JSON output for reliable parsing of critique results.
Separate generation and evaluation into distinct components for clearer responsibilities.
class EvaluatorOptimizer:
def __init__(self, score_threshold: float = 0.8):
self.score_threshold = score_threshold
def generate(self, task: str) -> str:
return llm(f"Complete: {task}")
def evaluate(self, output: str, task: str) -> dict:
return json.loads(llm(f"""
Evaluate output for task: {task}
Output: {output}
Return JSON: {{"overall_score": 0-1, "dimensions": {{"accuracy": ..., "clarity": ...}}}}
"""))
def optimize(self, output: str, feedback: dict) -> str:
return llm(f"Improve based on feedback: {feedback}\nOutput: {output}")
def run(self, task: str, max_iterations: int = 3) -> str:
output = self.generate(task)
for _ in range(max_iterations):
evaluation = self.evaluate(output, task)
if evaluation["overall_score"] >= self.score_threshold:
break
output = self.optimize(output, evaluation)
return output
Test-driven refinement loop for code generation.
class CodeReflector:
def reflect_and_fix(self, spec: str, max_iterations: int = 3) -> str:
code = llm(f"Write Python code for: {spec}")
tests = llm(f"Generate pytest tests for: {spec}\nCode: {code}")
for _ in range(max_iterations):
result = run_tests(code, tests)
if result["success"]:
return code
code = llm(f"Fix error: {result['error']}\nCode: {code}")
return code
Evaluate whether output achieves the expected result.
def evaluate_outcome(task: str, output: str, expected: str) -> str:
return llm(f"Does output achieve expected outcome? Task: {task}, Expected: {expected}, Output: {output}")
Use LLM to compare and rank outputs.
def llm_judge(output_a: str, output_b: str, criteria: str) -> str:
return llm(f"Compare outputs A and B for {criteria}. Which is better and why?")
Score outputs against weighted dimensions.
RUBRIC = {
"accuracy": {"weight": 0.4},
"clarity": {"weight": 0.3},
"completeness": {"weight": 0.3}
}
def evaluate_with_rubric(output: str, rubric: dict) -> float:
scores = json.loads(llm(f"Rate 1-5 for each dimension: {list(rubric.keys())✓Make data-driven prioritization decisions faster
Stakeholder Communication
Draft PRDs, status updates, and stakeholder presentations
Example
Create executive summary of Q3 roadmap, monthly progress report, feature launch announcement
✓Save 3-5 hours/week on communication overhead
Implementation Guide
Prerequisites
- ›Claude Desktop or compatible AI client
- ›Access to product documentation and roadmap tools (Jira, Notion, etc.)
- ›Understanding of product management frameworks (RICE, Jobs-to-be-Done, etc.)
- ›Stakeholder contact information and communication channels
Time Estimate
30-60 minutes to see productivity improvements
Steps
- 1Install product management skill
- 2Start with user story generation for known feature
- 3Progress to competitive analysis: research 2-3 competitors
- 4Use for roadmap prioritization: apply RICE/ICE scoring
- 5Draft stakeholder communications and refine based on feedback
- 6Build template library for recurring PM tasks
- 7Share effective prompts with product team
Common Pitfalls
- ⚠Not validating competitive research—verify facts before sharing
- ⚠Accepting user stories without involving engineering team
- ⚠Over-relying on frameworks without qualitative judgment
- ⚠Not customizing outputs to company culture and communication style
- ⚠Skipping stakeholder validation of generated requirements
Best Practices
✓ Do
- +Validate research and competitive analysis with real data
- +Collaborate with engineering when generating technical requirements
- +Customize frameworks and templates to your company context
- +Use skill for first drafts, refine with stakeholder input
- +Document successful prompt patterns for PM tasks
- +Combine AI efficiency with human judgment and intuition
✗ Don't
- −Don't publish competitive analysis without fact-checking
- −Don't finalize user stories without engineering review
- −Don't make prioritization decisions solely on AI scoring
- −Don't skip customer validation of generated requirements
- −Don't ignore company-specific context and culture
💡 Pro Tips
- ★Provide context: company goals, constraints, customer feedback
- ★Ask for alternatives: 'Show 3 ways to prioritize this roadmap'
- ★Request stakeholder-specific formatting: 'Executive summary vs. engineering spec'
- ★Use skill for 70% generation + 30% customization to company needs
When to Use This
✓ Use when
Use for user story writing, competitive research, roadmap prioritization, stakeholder communication, and PRD drafting. Best for reducing repetitive documentation and research work.
✗ Avoid when
Avoid for strategic product vision (requires deep customer empathy), pricing decisions (needs market and financial expertise), or when face-to-face customer discovery is more valuable than speed.
Learning Path
- 1Basic: user stories, feature specs, status updates
- 2Intermediate: competitive analysis, prioritization frameworks, PRDs
- 3Advanced: product strategy, go-to-market planning, OKR setting
- 4Expert: product vision, market positioning, business model innovation
Related Skills
premium-frontend-ui
230github/awesome-copilot
Frontendsame repojava-springboot
52github/awesome-copilot
Backendsame repogrill-me
679mattpocock/skills
Productivitysame categorypremortem
214parcadei/continuous-claude-v3
Productivitysame categorydeslop
161cursor/plugins
Productivitysame categorytravel-planner
138ailabs-393/ai-labs-claude-skills
Productivitysame categoryReviews
4.6★★★★★52 reviews- XXiao Liu★★★★★Dec 28, 2024
agentic-eval fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- KKiara Gill★★★★★Dec 20, 2024
Registry listing for agentic-eval matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- LLi Nasser★★★★★Dec 16, 2024
Keeps context tight: agentic-eval is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
- AAmelia Thompson★★★★★Nov 19, 2024
agentic-eval fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- KKiara Ghosh★★★★★Nov 15, 2024
agentic-eval is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
- ZZaid Iyer★★★★★Nov 11, 2024
agentic-eval reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- MMeera Chawla★★★★★Nov 7, 2024
I recommend agentic-eval for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
- HHassan Taylor★★★★★Oct 26, 2024
agentic-eval reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- CChen Khanna★★★★★Oct 10, 2024
agentic-eval is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
- NNoah Torres★★★★★Oct 6, 2024
agentic-eval fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
showing 1-10 of 52
1 / 6Discussion
Comments — not star reviews- No comments yet — start the thread.