oimiragieo/agent-studio

pipeline-evaluator

Evaluates completed agent pipelines across 5 scoring dimensions and produces a composite verdict with actionable recommendations

First seen Mar 22, 2026

Installation

$ npx skills add oimiragieo/agent-studio --skill pipeline-evaluator

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 oimiragieo/agent-studio · top by installs.

npx skills add oimiragieo/agent-studio

Browse all from oimiragieo/agent-studio

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 Not declared
GitHub Copilot Not declared
Windsurf Not declared
Gemini CLI Not declared
Cline Not declared
OpenCode Not declared

Repository health

Stars 40
Default branch main
Open issues 501
Status Active

Skill metadata

Parsed from SKILL.md frontmatter.

Version1.0.0
Declared agents claude-code

Package contents

Files included with this skill beyond the listing page.

  • skill md SKILL.md 6,492 B
  • docs SUMMARY.md 154 B

History

  1. First seen on skills.sh
  2. First recorded snapshot · 3 installs

SKILL.md

Pipeline Evaluator

Purpose

Score a completed agent pipeline across 5 dimensions and produce a structured evaluation report with a composite verdict (EXCELLENT/GOOD/ACCEPTABLE/NEEDS_IMPROVEMENT) and ranked recommendations.

When to Invoke

Skill({ skill: 'pipeline-evaluator' })

Invoke when:

  • A multi-task pipeline has completed and quality measurement is needed
  • Router requests post-pipeline quality gate
  • Reflection agent needs structured metrics for the rubric
  • Continuous improvement loop requires baseline data

Workflow

Step 1: Gather Pipeline Data

  1. Call TaskList() to retrieve all tasks associated with the pipeline.
  2. For each task, call TaskGet({ taskId }) to fetch full metadata including:

- status (completed/failed/blocked/cancelled) - metadata.summary - metadata.filesModified - metadata.deviations (array) - metadata.testResult (PASS/FAIL + counts) - metadata.completedAt vs task createdAt (for time efficiency)

  1. Read any plan file referenced in task metadata to cross-check task completion against planned scope.

Step 2: Score 5 Dimensions

Calculate each dimension score (0–100 unless noted):

D1: Task Completion Rate (weight: 30%)

completionRate = (completedTasks / totalTasks) * 100
  • Count tasks with status: "completed" as completed.
  • Tasks with status: "failed" or status: "cancelled" count against.
  • Blocked tasks that resolved and completed count as completed.

Score mapping:

  • 100% → 100
  • 90–99% → 85
  • 75–89% → 70
  • 60–74% → 50
  • <60% → 20

D2: Deviation Count (weight: 20%)

Count total deviations logged across all task metadata deviations[] arrays.

Score mapping (inverse — fewer is better):

  • 0 deviations → 100
  • 1–2 deviations → 85
  • 3–5 deviations → 65
  • 6–10 deviations → 40
  • > 10 deviations → 10

D3: Test Pass Rate (weight: 25%)

Parse metadata.testResult fields. Extract pass counts and fail counts from strings like "PASS 42/42" or "FAIL 38/42".

testPassRate = (totalPassed / totalTests) * 100

If no test results reported: use 50 as neutral score.

D4: Time Efficiency (weight: 10%)

Compare actual pipeline duration vs estimated duration (if available in plan file).

efficiency = min(estimatedDuration / actualDuration, 1.0) * 100

If no estimate available: score 70 (neutral).

D5: Quality Score (weight: 15%)

Derived from code quality signals in task metadata:

  • Each task that ran pnpm lint:fix with zero errors: +10 points base
  • Each task that ran pnpm format with no changes: +5 points base
  • Deduct 5 points per task that reported lint errors
  • Deduct 10 points per task with unresolved TODOs in modified files

Cap at 100. Default to 60 if no quality signals present.

Step 3: Calculate Composite Score

composite = (D1 * 0.30) + (D2 * 0.20) + (D3 * 0.25) + (D4 * 0.10) + (D5 * 0.15)

Step 4: Determine Verdict

Composite Score Verdict
> 90 EXCELLENT
> 75 GOOD
> 60 ACCEPTABLE
≤ 60 NEEDS_IMPROVEMENT

Step 5: Generate Recommendations

For each dimension scoring below 80, generate a specific recommendation:

  • Task Completion Rate < 80: "Investigate failed/cancelled tasks — review blocker patterns and add prerequisite checks to planner prompts."
  • Deviation Count > 5: "High deviation count suggests scope creep. Add DR-3 architectural escalation gates and tighten task scoping in planner."
  • Test Pass Rate < 80: "Failing tests indicate implementation gaps. Enforce TDD red-green cycle and add pre-completion test gate."
  • Time Efficiency < 70: "Pipeline ran significantly over estimate. Profile slowest tasks and consider parallelization or task decomposition."
  • Quality Score < 70: "Lint/format issues present. Add blocking lint gate to pre-completion validation hook."

Sort recommendations by severity (lowest score dimension first).

Step 6: Write Evaluation Report

Write the structured evaluation to .claude/context/reports/backend/pipeline-eval-{pipelineId}-{YYYY-MM-DD}.md:

<!-- Agent: pipeline-evaluator | Task: #{taskId} | Session: {date} -->

# Pipeline Evaluation: {pipelineId}

**Evaluated At**: {ISO timestamp}
**Verdict**: {VERDICT}
**Composite Score**: {score}/100

## Dimension Scores

| Dimension            | Score | Weight | Weighted   |
| -------------------- | ----- | ------ | ---------- |
| Task Completion Rate | {D1}  | 30%    | {D1\*0.3}  |
| Deviation Count      | {D2}  | 20%    | {D2\*0.2}  |
| Test Pass Rate       | {D3}  | 25%    | {D3\*0.25} |
| Time Efficiency      | {D4}  | 10%    | {D4\*0.1}  |
| Quality Score        | {D5}  | 15%    | {D5\*0.15} |

## Recommendations

{ranked recommendations list}

Also write the machine-readable JSON to .claude/context/reports/backend/pipeline-eval-{pipelineId}-{YYYY-MM-DD}.json conforming to pipeline-evaluation.schema.json.


Scoring Reference

Verdict Composite Meaning
EXCELLENT > 90 Pipeline executed near-perfectly
GOOD > 75 Minor issues; no systemic problems
ACCEPTABLE > 60 Notable gaps but goals met
NEEDS_IMPROVEMENT ≤ 60 Systemic issues require intervention

Anti-Patterns

  • Never score a pipeline before all tasks have reached a terminal state (completed/failed/cancelled).
  • Never use only task count as a proxy for quality — always check test pass rate.
  • Never omit the JSON report — machine-readable output is required for trend tracking.
  • Never assign EXCELLENT without verifying test pass rate > 90%.

Related Skills

  • reflection — Uses pipeline evaluation scores in the rubric
  • tdd — Informs the Test Pass Rate dimension
  • verification-before-completion — Pre-completion gates that feed quality signals