Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →wshobson/eval-harness-first
Build the evaluation harness that gates every fine-tuning run — golden sets, per-failure-mode graders, judge calibration, and base-model baselines.
Passed 22 of 24 test cases with the skill, and 13 of 24 without it.
and 14 more in the full report
10 fixed12 passed either way1 still failing1 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
One of 10 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
An automated training script is configured to output evaluation logs from fine-tuning checkpoints directly into `eval/runs/run_001/results.json`. Is this path compliant with the directory contract?
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| Store run outputs under `runs/<run-id>/results.json`. | Missed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
The Phase 0 gate for the whole plugin:
finetuning-method-selection and every downstream
skill assume this harness exists before a training
config gets written. The harness is not a run-end
side artifact — it is the data-curation engine. The
same labeled traces that build the goldens feed
training data, minus an explicit holdout.
Input: production/agent traces if they exist, or
a task spec if they don't, plus labelers willing to
grade ≥100 examples.
Output format: the eval/ directory below —
goldens, graders, drift suite, and the base-model
baseline that later phases gate on.
No eval harness, no fine-tune. Skip to a training config and there is nothing to measure against, nothing to catch regressions, and no labeled data to train on. The flywheel:
eval/goldens.jsonl
ID stays excluded from training data by ID.test cases passed, vs 13 / 24 without
More skills from the same source and nearby in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.