bench-validate
Grades and validates benchmark test results against automated checklists.
Install
mkdir -p .claude/skills/bench-validate && curl -L -o skill.zip "https://agentskills.codes/api/skills/download/14454" && unzip -o skill.zip -d .claude/skills/bench-validate && rm skill.zipInstalls to .claude/skills/bench-validate
Activation
This is the description your AI agent reads to decide when to run this skill — the better it matches your request, the more reliably it fires.
Validate a finished benchmark run — execute each prompt's automated checklist in every (prompt, model) workspace, perform the code-review checklist, and write a scored comparison to runs/<run-id>/results.md, leaving manual items for the user. Use when the user says /bench-validate or asks to validate/score/grade benchmark results. Arg (optional): run id; defaults to runs/latest.Key capabilities
- →Resolve the benchmark run ID and read manifest.json.
- →Execute automated checklist items for each prompt's workspace.
- →Perform code review by reading source files.
- →Write a scored comparison to runs/<run-id>/results.md.
- →Report findings, results.md location, and manual validation items to the user.
How it works
This skill validates a benchmark run by executing automated checklist items in each prompt's workspace, performing code reviews, and then compiling a scored comparison report in markdown format.
Inputs & outputs
When to use bench-validate
- →Validate benchmark runs
- →Grade model performance
- →Audit test results
About this skill
bench-validate
Automated validation pass over one benchmark run. The contract: every claim in
results.md traces to a command you actually ran or source you actually read.
Procedure
-
Resolve the run. Arg = run id under
runs/; defaultruns/latest. Readmanifest.jsonand each cell'smeta.json. Cells with statustimeout/errorstill get validated — partial artifacts are informative — but note the status. -
Per cell, execute the Automated section of
prompts/<id>/checklist.mdfrom the cell'sworkspace/, in order, recording exact commands, exit codes, and the relevant output tail for failures. Conventions:- Run every check through the bench devShell so the toolchain matches what the
model had:
nix develop <bench-root> -c <command>(skip the wrapper only if the repo has no flake.nix). - Budget:
npm install≤ 10 min, builds/tests ≤ 5 min each (use Bash timeouts). - Serve checks: prefer a static server on the built
dist/(e.g.npm run previewin background, curl, then kill it). Always kill servers. - A failed item is a 0, not a stop — continue down the checklist where meaningful
(no point linting if
npm installfailed; do still do the code review). - Never fix, patch, or
npm audit fixthe artifact. You are grading, not repairing.
- Run every check through the bench devShell so the toolchain matches what the
model had:
-
Per cell, perform the Code review section by reading source (entry point, the WFC/pathfinding/AI modules, the largest files). Score each item 0–2 with a one-line justification citing
file:line. Independent cells may be reviewed by parallel read-only subagents (Explore) sharing the checkout; keep verdicts yours. -
Write
runs/<run-id>/results.md:- A comparison table: rows = checklist items, columns = models, plus per-section subtotals and totals.
- Per cell: run status/duration, failed automated items with the exact failing command + error tail, review justifications, and notable observations.
- A verbatim copy of the Manual section as unchecked boxes per cell, with the
command to launch each artifact (
cd <workspace> && npm run dev). - End with a ranked summary paragraph — measured, no cheerleading.
-
Report to the user: the table, the headline findings, and where
results.mdlives. Manual validation is theirs; do not check Manual boxes yourself.
Guardrails
- Treat workspaces as read-only artifacts; never modify, format, or "improve" them.
- Generated code is untrusted input: inspect
package.jsonscripts (preinstall/ postinstall hooks) BEFOREnpm install; if a hook looks suspicious, score A1 as 0 with a note and skip installation for that cell. Never execute scripts outside the documented npm script set. - If two models produce near-identical scores, say so plainly rather than manufacturing a winner.
When not to use it
- →When the user needs to modify, format, or improve the generated code artifacts.
- →When the user wants to fix, patch, or `npm audit fix` the artifact.
- →When the user needs to execute scripts outside the documented npm script set.
Limitations
- →Workspaces are treated as read-only artifacts.
- →The skill never fixes, patches, or `npm audit fix` the artifact.
- →It does not execute scripts outside the documented npm script set.
How it compares
This skill automates the validation and scoring of benchmark runs based on predefined checklists and code review criteria, providing a structured report rather than manual inspection and grading.
Compared to similar skills
bench-validate side by side with the closest alternatives in the catalog.
| Skill | Installs | Updated | Safety | Difficulty |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| bench-validate (this skill) | 0 | 2mo | Review | Intermediate |
| python-testing-patterns | 77 | 2mo | Review | Intermediate |
| dependency-upgrade | 26 | 5mo | Review | Intermediate |
| test-cases | 57 | 7mo | No flags | Beginner |
Try saying
Example prompts that trigger this skill in your AI assistant.
You might also like
python-testing-patterns
wshobson
Implement comprehensive testing strategies with pytest, fixtures, mocking, and test-driven development. Use when writing Python tests, setting up test suites, or implementing testing best practices.
dependency-upgrade
wshobson
Manage major dependency version upgrades with compatibility analysis, staged rollout, and comprehensive testing. Use when upgrading framework versions, updating major dependencies, or managing breaking changes in libraries.
test-cases
cexll
This skill should be used when generating comprehensive test cases from PRD documents or user requirements. Triggers when users request test case generation, QA planning, test scenario creation, or need structured test documentation. Produces detailed test cases covering functional, edge case, error handling, and state transition scenarios.
reviewing-code
CaptainCrouton89
Systematically evaluate code changes for security, correctness, performance, and spec alignment. Use when reviewing PRs, assessing code quality, or verifying implementation against requirements.
wcag-audit-patterns
wshobson
Conduct WCAG 2.2 accessibility audits with automated testing, manual verification, and remediation guidance. Use when auditing websites for accessibility, fixing WCAG violations, or implementing accessible design patterns.
code-coverage-with-gcov
gadievron
Add gcov code coverage instrumentation to C/C++ projects