| name | agent-evaluation |
| description | Use this when you need to EVALUATE OR IMPROVE or OPTIMIZE an existing LLM agent's output quality - including improving tool selection accuracy, answer quality, reducing costs, or fixing issues where the agent gives wrong/incomplete responses. Evaluates agents systematically using MLflow evaluation with datasets, scorers, and tracing. IMPORTANT - Always also load the instrumenting-with-mlflow-tracing skill before starting any work. Covers end-to-end evaluation workflow or individual components (tracing setup, dataset creation, scorer definition, evaluation execution). |
| allowed-tools | Read, Write, Bash, Grep, Glob, WebFetch |
Agent Evaluation with MLflow
Comprehensive guide for evaluating GenAI agents with MLflow. Use this skill for the complete evaluation workflow or individual components - tracing setup, environment configuration, dataset creation, scorer definition, or evaluation execution. Each section can be used independently based on your needs.
⛔ CRITICAL: Must Use MLflow APIs
DO NOT create custom evaluation frameworks. You MUST use MLflow's native APIs:
- Datasets: Use
mlflow.genai.datasets.create_dataset() - NOT custom test case files
- Scorers: Use
mlflow.genai.scorers and mlflow.genai.judges.make_judge() - NOT custom scorer functions
- Evaluation: Use
mlflow.genai.evaluate() - NOT custom evaluation loops
- Scripts: Use the provided
scripts/ directory templates - NOT custom evaluation/ directories
Why? MLflow tracks everything (datasets, scorers, traces, results) in the experiment. Custom frameworks bypass this and lose all observability.
If you're tempted to create evaluation/eval_dataset.py or similar custom files, STOP. Use scripts/create_dataset_template.py instead.
Table of Contents
- Quick Start
- Documentation Access Protocol
- Setup Overview
- Evaluation Workflow
- References
Quick Start
⚠️ REMINDER: Use MLflow APIs from this skill. Do not create custom evaluation frameworks.
Setup (prerequisite): Install MLflow 3.8+, configure environment, integrate tracing
Evaluation workflow in 5 steps (each uses MLflow APIs):
- Understand: Run agent, inspect traces, understand purpose
- Scorers: Select and register scorers for quality criteria
- Dataset: ALWAYS discover existing datasets first, only create new if needed
3.5. Dry Run: Run 3 questions first — catch broken tools and misconfigured scorers before full eval
- Evaluate: Run agent on dataset, apply scorers, analyze results
Command Conventions
Always use uv run for MLflow and Python commands:
uv run mlflow --version
uv run python scripts/xxx.py
uv run python -c "..."
This ensures commands run in the correct environment with proper dependencies.
CRITICAL: Separate stderr from stdout when capturing CLI output:
When saving CLI command output to files for parsing (JSON, CSV, etc.), always redirect stderr separately to avoid mixing logs with structured data:
uv run mlflow traces evaluate ... --output json > results.json 2> evaluation.log
Documentation Access Protocol
All MLflow documentation must be accessed through llms.txt:
- Start at:
https://mlflow.org/docs/latest/llms.txt
- Query llms.txt for your topic with specific prompt
- If llms.txt references another doc, use WebFetch with that URL
- Do not use WebSearch - use WebFetch with llms.txt first
This applies to all steps, especially:
- Dataset creation (read GenAI dataset docs from llms.txt)
- Scorer registration (check MLflow docs for scorer APIs)
- Evaluation execution (understand mlflow.genai.evaluate API)
Discovering Agent Structure
Each project has unique structure. Use dynamic exploration instead of assumptions:
Find Agent Entry Points
grep -r "def.*agent" . --include="*.py"
grep -r "def (run|stream|handle|process)" . --include="*.py"
ls main.py app.py src/*/agent.py 2>/dev/null
grep -r "@app\.(get|post)" . --include="*.py"
grep -r "def.*route" . --include="*.py"
Understand Project Structure
cat pyproject.toml setup.py 2>/dev/null | grep -A 5 "scripts\|entry_points"
cat README.md docs/*.md 2>/dev/null | head -100
ls -la src/ app/ agent/ 2>/dev/null
Setup Overview
Pre-check: Use Existing Environment
Before doing ANY setup, check if MLFLOW_TRACKING_URI and MLFLOW_EXPERIMENT_ID are already set:
echo "MLFLOW_TRACKING_URI=$MLFLOW_TRACKING_URI"
echo "MLFLOW_EXPERIMENT_ID=$MLFLOW_EXPERIMENT_ID"
If BOTH are already set, skip Steps 1-2 entirely. The environment is pre-configured. Do NOT run setup_mlflow.py, do NOT create a .env file, do NOT override these values. Go directly to Step 3 (tracing integration) and the evaluation workflow.
Setup Steps (only if environment is NOT pre-configured)
- Install MLflow (version >=3.8.0)
- Configure environment (tracking URI and experiment)
- Guide: Follow
references/setup-guide.md Steps 1-2
- Integrate tracing (autolog and @mlflow.trace decorators)
- ⚠️ MANDATORY: Use the
instrumenting-with-mlflow-tracing skill for tracing setup
- ✓ VERIFY: Run
scripts/validate_tracing_runtime.py after implementing
⚠️ Tracing must work before evaluation. If tracing fails, stop and troubleshoot.
Checkpoint - verify before proceeding:
Validation scripts:
uv run python scripts/validate_environment.py
uv run python scripts/validate_auth.py
Evaluation Workflow
Step 1: Agent Interview (REQUIRED — do not skip)
Before doing anything else, ask the user these questions. Do NOT proceed until you have answers.
Required:
- "What does your agent do? Describe its purpose in 1-2 sentences."
- "What are the 2-3 most important things it needs to get right?"
- "Are there common failure modes you've already noticed?"
Use answers to:
- Derive scorer names and criteria (do not invent them)
- Write the
agent_description parameter for generate_evals_df
- Set evaluation priorities
If running in automated mode: Read agent purpose from the codebase (SKILL.md, README, or main entry point docstring). Still surface what you found and confirm before proceeding.
Step 2: Define Quality Scorers
- Check registered scorers in your experiment:
uv run mlflow scorers list -x $MLFLOW_EXPERIMENT_ID
IMPORTANT: if there are registered scorers in the experiment then they must be used for evaluation.
- Select additional built-in scorers that apply to the agent
See references/scorers.md for the built-in scorers. Select any that are useful for assessing the agent's quality and that are not already registered.
- Create additional custom scorers as needed
If needed, create additional scorers using the make_judge() API. See references/scorers.md on how to create custom scorers and references/scorers-constraints.md for best practices.
⚠️ CRITICAL — Scorer Return Values: Scorers MUST instruct the LLM judge to return "yes" or "no" (or booleans/numerics). Return values of "pass" or "fail" are silently cast to None by _cast_assessment_value_to_float and excluded from results.metrics with no error or warning — results simply disappear. See references/scorers-constraints.md Constraint 2 for the full list of safe vs. broken return values.
-
REQUIRED: Register new scorers before evaluation using Python API:
from mlflow.genai.judges import make_judge
from mlflow.genai.scorers import BuiltinScorerName
import os
scorer = make_judge(...)
scorer.register()
** IMPORTANT: See references/scorers.md → "Model Selection for Scorers" to configure the model parameter of scorers before registration.
⚠️ Scorers MUST be registered before evaluation. Inline scorers that aren't registered won't appear in mlflow scorers list and won't be reusable.
- Verify registration:
uv run mlflow scorers list -x $MLFLOW_EXPERIMENT_ID
Step 3: Prepare Evaluation Dataset
ALWAYS discover existing datasets first to prevent duplicate work:
-
Run dataset discovery (mandatory):
uv run python scripts/list_datasets.py
uv run python scripts/list_datasets.py --format json
uv run python scripts/list_datasets.py --help
-
Present findings to user:
- Show all discovered datasets with their characteristics (size, topics covered)
- If datasets found, highlight most relevant options based on agent type
-
Ask user about existing datasets:
- "I found [N] existing evaluation dataset(s). Do you want to use one of these? (y/n)"
- If yes: Ask which dataset to use and record the dataset name — skip to Step 3.5
- If no: Proceed to Phase A below
If creating a new dataset, use the two-phase approach below.
Phase A: Sanity Check (5 questions — always run first)
Create a minimal 5-question dataset manually from the Step 1 interview answers. The goal is to confirm the pipeline works end-to-end before investing in large-scale generation.
import mlflow
from mlflow.genai.datasets import create_dataset
sanity_records = [
{"inputs": {"query": "<question 1 from interview>"}, "expected_response": "<expected answer>"},
{"inputs": {"query": "<question 2 from interview>"}, "expected_response": "<expected answer>"},
]
sanity_dataset = create_dataset(
records=sanity_records,
name="sanity-check-5q",
)
Run evaluation on this dataset (see Step 4), then present results to the user with this framing:
"This is a sanity check — 5 questions confirm the pipeline works but aren't statistically meaningful. Proceeding to Phase B to generate a proper evaluation set."
Only proceed to Phase B once Phase A completes without errors.
Phase B: Proper Evaluation Dataset (100+ questions — run after Phase A passes)
Generate questions from the agent's actual corpus rather than inventing them from scratch. The approach depends on whether the project uses Databricks or OSS MLflow.
On Databricks — use generate_evals_df to synthesize questions from the agent's document corpus:
from databricks.agents.evals import generate_evals_df, estimate_synthetic_num_evals
import mlflow
agent_description = "<agent purpose from interview>"
evals = generate_evals_df(
docs=docs_df,
num_evals=100,
agent_description=agent_description,
)
dataset = mlflow.genai.datasets.create_dataset(name="generated-evals-100q")
dataset.merge_records(evals)
To estimate the right num_evals before generating:
recommended = estimate_synthetic_num_evals(docs_df)
print(f"Recommended num_evals: {recommended}")
Dataset size guidance:
- <30 questions: not statistically meaningful — avoid drawing conclusions
- 50–100 questions: adequate for catching regressions, suitable for most agents
- 200+ questions: recommended when comparing model variants or scoring multiple dimensions
On OSS MLflow — use RAGAS TestsetGenerator to generate from your document corpus:
from ragas.testset import TestsetGenerator
from ragas.llms import LangchainLLMWrapper
from ragas.embeddings import LangchainEmbeddingsWrapper
generator = TestsetGenerator(
llm=LangchainLLMWrapper(your_llm),
embedding_model=LangchainEmbeddingsWrapper(your_embeddings),
)
testset = generator.generate_with_langchain_docs(docs, testset_size=100)
evals_df = testset.to_pandas()
import mlflow
records = [
{"inputs": {"query": row["user_input"]}, "expected_response": row["reference"]}
for _, row in evals_df.iterrows()
]
dataset = mlflow.genai.datasets.create_dataset(name="generated-evals-100q")
dataset.merge_records(records)
If no document corpus is available — ask the user to provide 50–100 representative queries from production logs or usage history. These are more realistic than synthetic questions and are preferable when available.
IMPORTANT: Do not skip dataset discovery. Always run list_datasets.py first, even if you plan to create a new dataset. This prevents duplicate work and ensures users are aware of existing evaluation datasets.
For complete dataset guide: See references/dataset-preparation.md
Checkpoint - verify before proceeding:
Step 3.5: Dry Run (REQUIRED before full eval)
Run evaluation on 3 questions from the dataset before committing to the full run. This catches broken tools, misconfigured scorers, and auth failures early — before they silently corrupt 100-question results.
If you completed Phase A above, the pipeline is already validated — focus the dry run on scorer output only.
import mlflow
dataset = mlflow.genai.datasets.get_dataset(name="<your-dataset-name>")
dry_run_records = dataset.df.head(3)
Run mlflow.genai.evaluate() on these 3 records using the same wrapper and scorers as the full eval.
For each response, check:
- Tool calls — Did the agent call any tools? If it called zero tools on questions that require retrieval, tools are likely broken (403s, rate limits, missing credentials).
- Response quality — Are responses empty or generic ("I don't know", "I can't help with that")? Empty responses score as irrelevant and will skew the full eval.
- Scorer output — Did all 3 scores come back as
0 or None? If so, the scorer is misconfigured (check return values — "pass"/"fail" are silently cast to None; use "yes"/"no" instead).
Decision gate:
- If dry run shows tool failures or empty responses: Stop. Fix the underlying issue (auth, tool config, retrieval) before proceeding. Do not run the full eval on broken infrastructure.
- If all 3 scorer outputs are 0 or None: Stop. Debug scorer return values and re-register before proceeding.
- If dry run passes: Report to the user: "Dry run passed (3/3 responses non-empty, tools called, scores non-zero). Proceeding to full eval." Then continue to Step 4.
Why this matters: Tool failures (403s from docs scraping, GitHub API rate limits) produce empty agent responses that score as 0. Running a 100-question eval only to discover all tools were failing wastes time and produces misleading results. The dry run catches this in under a minute.
Step 4: Run Evaluation
Large datasets (50+ questions)? See references/throughput-guide.md for throughput optimization — covers parallelism env vars, async predict functions, and dataset splitting for 200+ question evals.
4a. Estimate Runtime Before Starting
Before launching evaluation, tell the user how long it will take:
-
Count the dataset questions:
import mlflow
dataset = mlflow.genai.datasets.get_dataset(name="<your-dataset-name>")
print(f"Dataset size: {len(dataset.df)} questions")
-
Calculate the estimate — each question runs the agent once and the judge scorer once:
- Opus-class judge models (e.g.
claude-opus-4): ~45–90s per question
- Sonnet-class judge models (e.g.
claude-sonnet-4): ~20–45s per question
- Multiple scorers per question add time proportionally
Estimated time = N questions × 30–60s per question ÷ parallelism factor (typically 4–8x)
-
Tell the user before starting:
"This dataset has N questions. At ~30–60s per question with typical parallelism, evaluation will take approximately X–Y minutes. I'll run it as a background task so you can continue working — I'll summarize the results when it's done."
4b. Generate the Evaluation Script
uv run python scripts/run_evaluation_template.py \
--module mlflow_agent.agent \
--entry-point run_agent
The generated script creates a wrapper function that:
- Accepts keyword arguments matching the dataset's input keys
- Provides any additional arguments the agent needs (like
llm_provider)
- Runs
mlflow.genai.evaluate(data=df, predict_fn=wrapper, scorers=registered_scorers)
- Saves results to
evaluation_results.csv
⚠️ CRITICAL: wrapper Signature Must Match Dataset Input Keys
MLflow calls predict_fn(**inputs) - it unpacks the inputs dict as keyword arguments.
| Dataset Record | MLflow Calls | predict_fn Must Be |
|---|
{"inputs": {"query": "..."}} | predict_fn(query="...") | def wrapper(query): |
{"inputs": {"question": "...", "context": "..."}} | predict_fn(question="...", context="...") | def wrapper(question, context): |
Common Mistake (WRONG):
def wrapper(inputs):
return agent(inputs["query"])
4c. Launch as a Background Sub-Agent
Run the evaluation as a background sub-agent so the main session stays available. Use the Agent tool with run_in_background: true:
Sub-agent instructions (pass these verbatim):
Run the agent evaluation and write results to scratchpad.
Steps:
1. cd <project-directory>
2. Run: uv run python run_agent_evaluation.py
3. When complete, write a summary to scratchpad/eval-results.md with:
- Exit status (success or error message)
- Path to results file (evaluation_results.csv)
- Wall-clock time taken
4. Return only: "Evaluation complete. Results written to scratchpad/eval-results.md"
In the main session, poll for completion by checking for the scratchpad file rather than blocking:
Do NOT use TaskOutput to wait for the background agent — that dumps the full transcript (~10–20k tokens) into the main context.
4d. Analyze Results (after evaluation completes)
Once scratchpad/eval-results.md appears, run analysis:
uv run python scripts/analyze_results.py evaluation_results.csv
Generates evaluation_report.md with per-scorer pass rates and improvement suggestions.
The script reads {scorer_name}/value and {scorer_name}/rationale columns from the CSV.
It also accepts the legacy JSON format from mlflow traces evaluate for backward compatibility:
uv run python scripts/analyze_results.py evaluation_results.json
uv run python scripts/analyze_results.py evaluation_results.csv --output my_report.md
References
Detailed guides in references/ (load as needed):
- setup-guide.md - Environment setup (MLflow install, tracking URI configuration)
- Tracing: Use the
instrumenting-with-mlflow-tracing skill (authoritative guide for autolog, decorators, session tracking, verification)
- dataset-preparation.md - Dataset schema, APIs, creation, Unity Catalog
- scorers.md - Built-in vs custom scorers, registration, testing
- scorers-constraints.md - CLI requirements for custom scorers (yes/no format, templates)
- troubleshooting.md - Common errors by phase with solutions
- throughput-guide.md - Parallelism env vars, async predict_fn, dataset splitting for 200+ question evals
Scripts are self-documenting - run with --help for usage details.