affaan-m/ecc

agent-eval

Head-to-head comparison of coding agents (Claude Code, Aider, Codex, etc.) on custom tasks with pass rate, cost, time, and consistency metrics.

All-time #1960 Trending #2877 First seen May 19, 2026
8-week activity · all time api

Installation

$ npx skills add affaan-m/ecc --skill agent-eval

Summary

  • Head-to-head comparison of coding agents (Claude Code, Aider, Codex, etc.) on custom tasks with pass rate, cost, time, and consistency metrics.
  • Use when choosing between coding agents, or when a change to an agent setup needs measured pass rate, cost, and time rather than an impression.

Similar popular skills

Related neighbors and high-traction skills in the same topics — useful to compare before installing.

Also in this package

Other skills from affaan-m/ecc · top by installs.

npx skills add affaan-m/ecc

Browse all from affaan-m/ecc

More details

Agent compatibility

Declared targets from SKILL.md / docs. Unmarked agents are not listed — the skill may still install via the CLI.

Claude Code Declared
Cursor Not declared
Codex Declared
GitHub Copilot Not declared
Windsurf Not declared
Gemini CLI Not declared
Cline Not declared
OpenCode Not declared

Repository health

Stars 254.3K
License LICENSE
Default branch main
Open issues 54
Status Active

Skill metadata

Parsed from SKILL.md frontmatter.

LicenseMIT
Declared agents claude-code codex
More metadata
origin
ECC

Package contents

Files included with this skill beyond the listing page.

  • skill md SKILL.md 4,696 B
  • docs SUMMARY.md 302 B

History

  1. First seen on skills.sh
  2. First recorded snapshot · 7,934 installs

SKILL.md

Agent Eval Skill

A lightweight CLI tool for comparing coding agents head-to-head on reproducible tasks. Every "which coding agent is best?" comparison runs on vibes — this tool systematizes it.

When to Activate

  • Comparing coding agents (Claude Code, Aider, Codex, etc.) on your own codebase
  • Measuring agent performance before adopting a new tool or model
  • Running regression checks when an agent updates its model or tooling
  • Producing data-backed agent selection decisions for a team

Installation

Note: Install agent-eval from its repository after reviewing the source.

Core Concepts

YAML Task Definitions

Define tasks declaratively. Each task specifies what to do, which files to touch, and how to judge success:

name: add-retry-logic
description: Add exponential backoff retry to the HTTP client
repo: ./my-project
files:
  - src/http_client.py
prompt: |
  Add retry logic with exponential backoff to all HTTP requests.
  Max 3 retries. Initial delay 1s, max delay 30s.
judge:
  - type: pytest
    command: pytest tests/test_http_client.py -v
  - type: grep
    pattern: "exponential_backoff|retry"
    files: src/http_client.py
commit: "abc1234"  # pin to specific commit for reproducibility

Git Worktree Isolation

Each agent run gets its own git worktree — no Docker required. This provides reproducibility isolation so agents cannot interfere with each other or corrupt the base repo.

Metrics Collected

Metric What It Measures
Pass rate Did the agent produce code that passes the judge?
Cost API spend per task (when available)
Time Wall-clock seconds to completion
Consistency Pass rate across repeated runs (e.g., 3/3 = 100%)

Workflow

1. Define Tasks

Create a tasks/ directory with YAML files, one per task:

mkdir tasks
# Write task definitions (see template above)

2. Run Agents

Execute agents against your tasks:

agent-eval run --task tasks/add-retry-logic.yaml --agent claude-code --agent aider --runs 3

Each run:

  1. Creates a fresh git worktree from the specified commit
  2. Hands the prompt to the agent
  3. Runs the judge criteria
  4. Records pass/fail, cost, and time

3. Compare Results

Generate a comparison report:

agent-eval report --format table
Task: add-retry-logic (3 runs each)
┌──────────────┬───────────┬────────┬────────┬─────────────┐
│ Agent        │ Pass Rate │ Cost   │ Time   │ Consistency │
├──────────────┼───────────┼────────┼────────┼─────────────┤
│ claude-code  │ 3/3       │ $0.12  │ 45s    │ 100%        │
│ aider        │ 2/3       │ $0.08  │ 38s    │  67%        │
└──────────────┴───────────┴────────┴────────┴─────────────┘

Judge Types

Code-Based (deterministic)

judge:
  - type: pytest
    command: pytest tests/ -v
  - type: command
    command: npm run build

Pattern-Based

judge:
  - type: grep
    pattern: "class.*Retry"
    files: src/**/*.py

Model-Based (LLM-as-judge)

judge:
  - type: llm
    prompt: |
      Does this implementation correctly handle exponential backoff?
      Check for: max retries, increasing delays, jitter.

Best Practices

  • Start with 3-5 tasks that represent your real workload, not toy examples
  • Run at least 3 trials per agent to capture variance — agents are non-deterministic
  • Pin the commit in your task YAML so results are reproducible across days/weeks
  • Include at least one deterministic judge (tests, build) per task — LLM judges add noise
  • Track cost alongside pass rate — a 95% agent at 10x the cost may not be the right choice
  • Version your task definitions — they are test fixtures, treat them as code

Links