smithery/OmidZamani

dspy-evaluation-suite

Use for evaluating DSPy programs with Evaluate, answer_exact_match, SemanticF1, custom metrics, baselines, and program comparisons.

Installation

$ npx skills add smithery/OmidZamani --skill dspy-evaluation-suite

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 smithery/OmidZamani · top by installs.

npx skills add smithery/OmidZamani

Browse all from smithery/OmidZamani

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

Skill metadata

Parsed from SKILL.md frontmatter.

Version1.0.0
Allowed toolsRead, Write, Glob, Grep

Package contents

Files included with this skill beyond the listing page.

  • skill md SKILL.md 7,875 B
  • docs SUMMARY.md 391 B

History

  1. First recorded snapshot · 0 installs

SKILL.md

DSPy Evaluation Suite

Goal

Systematically evaluate DSPy programs using built-in and custom metrics with parallel execution.

When to Use

  • Measuring program performance before/after optimization
  • Comparing different program variants
  • Establishing baselines
  • Validating production readiness

Related Skills

  • Use with any optimizer: [dspy-bootstrap-fewshot](../dspy-bootstrap-fewshot/SKILL.md), [dspy-miprov2-optimizer](../dspy-miprov2-optimizer/SKILL.md), [dspy-gepa-reflective](../dspy-gepa-reflective/SKILL.md)
  • Evaluate RAG pipelines: [dspy-rag-pipeline](../dspy-rag-pipeline/SKILL.md)

Inputs

Input Type Description
program dspy.Module Program to evaluate
devset list[dspy.Example] Evaluation examples
metric callable Scoring function
num_threads int Parallel threads

Outputs

Output Type Description
score float Average metric score
results list Per-example results

Workflow

Phase 1: Setup Evaluator

from dspy.evaluate import Evaluate

evaluator = Evaluate(
    devset=devset,
    metric=my_metric,
    num_threads=8,
    display_progress=True
)

Phase 2: Run Evaluation

result = evaluator(my_program)
print(f"Score: {result.score:.2f}%")
# Access individual results: (example, prediction, score) tuples
for example, pred, score in result.results[:3]:
    print(f"Example: {example.question[:50]}... Score: {score}")

Built-in Metrics

answerexactmatch

import dspy

# Normalized, case-insensitive comparison
metric = dspy.evaluate.answer_exact_match

SemanticF1

LLM-based semantic evaluation:

from dspy.evaluate import SemanticF1

semantic = SemanticF1()
score = semantic(example, prediction)

Custom Metrics

Basic Metric

def exact_match(example, pred, trace=None):
    """Returns bool, int, or float."""
    return example.answer.lower().strip() == pred.answer.lower().strip()

Multi-Factor Metric

def quality_metric(example, pred, trace=None):
    """Score based on multiple factors."""
    score = 0.0
    
    # Correctness (50%)
    if example.answer.lower() in pred.answer.lower():
        score += 0.5
    
    # Conciseness (25%)
    if len(pred.answer.split()) <= 20:
        score += 0.25
    
    # Has reasoning (25%)
    if hasattr(pred, 'reasoning') and pred.reasoning:
        score += 0.25
    
    return score

GEPA-Compatible Metric

def feedback_metric(example, pred, trace=None, pred_name=None, pred_trace=None):
    """Return a GEPA-compatible score and textual feedback."""
    correct = example.answer.lower() in pred.answer.lower()
    
    if correct:
        return dspy.Prediction(score=1.0, feedback="Correct answer provided.")
    else:
        return dspy.Prediction(
            score=0.0,
            feedback=f"Expected '{example.answer}', got '{pred.answer}'"
        )

Production Example

import dspy
from dspy.evaluate import Evaluate, SemanticF1
import json
import logging
from typing import Optional
from dataclasses import dataclass

logger = logging.getLogger(__name__)

@dataclass
class EvaluationResult:
    score: float
    num_examples: int
    correct: int
    incorrect: int
    errors: int

def comprehensive_metric(example, pred, trace=None) -> float:
    """Multi-dimensional evaluation metric."""
    scores = []
    
    # 1. Correctness
    if hasattr(example, 'answer') and hasattr(pred, 'answer'):
        correct = example.answer.lower().strip() in pred.answer.lower().strip()
        scores.append(1.0 if correct else 0.0)
    
    # 2. Completeness (answer not empty or error)
    if hasattr(pred, 'answer'):
        complete = len(pred.answer.strip()) > 0 and "error" not in pred.answer.lower()
        scores.append(1.0 if complete else 0.0)
    
    # 3. Reasoning quality (if available)
    if hasattr(pred, 'reasoning'):
        has_reasoning = len(str(pred.reasoning)) > 20
        scores.append(1.0 if has_reasoning else 0.5)
    
    return sum(scores) / len(scores) if scores else 0.0

class EvaluationSuite:
    def __init__(self, devset, num_threads=8):
        self.devset = devset
        self.num_threads = num_threads
    
    def evaluate(self, program, metric=None) -> EvaluationResult:
        """Run full evaluation with detailed results."""
        metric = metric or comprehensive_metric

        evaluator = Evaluate(
            devset=self.devset,
            metric=metric,
            num_threads=self.num_threads,
            display_progress=True
        )

        eval_result = evaluator(program)

        # Extract individual scores from results
        scores = [score for example, pred, score in eval_result.results]
        correct = sum(1 for s in scores if s >= 0.5)
        errors = sum(1 for s in scores if s == 0)

        return EvaluationResult(
            score=eval_result.score,
            num_examples=len(self.devset),
            correct=correct,
            incorrect=len(self.devset) - correct - errors,
            errors=errors
        )
    
    def compare(self, programs: dict, metric=None) -> dict:
        """Compare multiple programs."""
        results = {}
        
        for name, program in programs.items():
            logger.info(f"Evaluating: {name}")
            results[name] = self.evaluate(program, metric)
        
        # Rank by score
        ranked = sorted(results.items(), key=lambda x: x[1].score, reverse=True)
        
        print("\n=== Comparison Results ===")
        for rank, (name, result) in enumerate(ranked, 1):
            print(f"{rank}. {name}: {result.score:.2%}")
        
        return results
    
    def export_report(self, program, output_path: str, metric=None):
        """Export detailed evaluation report."""
        result = self.evaluate(program, metric)
        
        report = {
            "summary": {
                "score": result.score,
                "total": result.num_examples,
                "correct": result.correct,
                "accuracy": result.correct / result.num_examples
            },
            "config": {
                "num_threads": self.num_threads,
                "num_examples": len(self.devset)
            }
        }
        
        with open(output_path, 'w') as f:
            json.dump(report, f, indent=2)
        
        logger.info(f"Report saved to {output_path}")
        return report

# Usage
suite = EvaluationSuite(devset, num_threads=8)

# Single evaluation
result = suite.evaluate(my_program)
print(f"Score: {result.score:.2%}")

# Compare variants
results = suite.compare({
    "baseline": baseline_program,
    "optimized": optimized_program,
    "finetuned": finetuned_program
})

Best Practices

  1. Hold out test data - Never optimize on evaluation set
  2. Multiple metrics - Combine correctness, quality, efficiency
  3. Statistical significance - Use enough examples (100+)
  4. Track over time - Version control evaluation results

Limitations

  • Metrics are task-specific; no universal measure
  • SemanticF1 requires LLM calls (cost)
  • Parallel evaluation can hit rate limits
  • Edge cases may not be captured

Official Documentation