ragas-evaluation

Use when a RAG pipeline (retriever plus generator) or an agent needs the widest set of evaluation metrics: Ragas faithfulness, response relevancy, context precision and recall, noise sensitivity, factual correctness, tool-call accuracy, agent goal accuracy and rubric scoring.

/plugin install qa-llm-evaluation@testland-qa

First time in Claude Code? Add the marketplace with /plugin marketplace add testland/qa

View source (opens in a new tab)
Skill
Category
AI & ML
Version
v1.4.4

The model: assemble a dataset (question + answer + retrieval contexts + ground truth), import the metrics relevant to the evaluation goal, run evaluate(), and inspect per-metric per-row scores (per rg-gh (opens in new window)).

When to use

  • The repo uses LangChain / LlamaIndex / Haystack / direct retriever→LLM RAG pipelines.
  • You need RAG-specific retrieval + generation quality scoring, or agents-style eval (tool-call and goal accuracy), and want the widest metric variety in OSS LLM-eval.

For non-RAG prompt evals, prefer promptfoo-evaluation. For pytest-native LLM evals with a managed dashboard, prefer deepeval-evaluation.

Step 1 - Install

Per rg-gh (opens in new window):

pip install ragas

Or from source:

pip install git+https://github.com/explodinggradients/ragas

Step 2 - Custom metric quickstart

Per rg-gh (opens in new window) (verbatim):

import asyncio
from openai import AsyncOpenAI
from ragas.metrics import DiscreteMetric
from ragas.llms import llm_factory

# Setup your LLM
client = AsyncOpenAI()
llm = llm_factory("gpt-4o", client=client)

# Create a custom aspect evaluator
metric = DiscreteMetric(
    name="summary_accuracy",
    allowed_values=["accurate", "inaccurate"],
    prompt="""Evaluate if the summary is accurate and captures
key information.
Response: {response}
Answer with only 'accurate' or 'inaccurate'."""
)

# Score your application's output
async def main():
    score = await metric.ascore(
        llm=llm,
        response="The summary of the text is..."
    )
    print(f"Score: {score.value}")
    print(f"Reason: {score.reason}")

if __name__ == "__main__":
    asyncio.run(main())

DiscreteMetric is the pattern for custom rubric-based scoring; the built-in metrics in Step 3 follow a similar shape but are preconfigured.

Step 3 - Pick metrics

Ragas ships 30+ metrics across RAG, Natural Language Comparison, Agents/Tool-Use, SQL, General Purpose, Nvidia, and Summarization families. The RAG core: Faithfulness (claims grounded in retrieved context), Response Relevancy, Context Precision, and Context Recall. Pick 3 - 5 per pipeline.

Full per-family catalog with each metric's use: references/metrics.md, sourced from docs.ragas.io/en/stable/concepts/metrics/available_metrics/ (opens in new window).

Step 4 - Dataset shape

Ragas accepts a Hugging Face Dataset or pandas.DataFrame with columns matching the metrics being run:

ColumnRequired by
questionAll RAG metrics
answerResponse Relevancy, Faithfulness, NL Comparison
contexts (list of strings)Context Precision/Recall, Faithfulness
ground_truthContext Recall, Factual Correctness, Answer Accuracy
reference_contextsContext-comparison metrics

See the per-metric pages on docs.ragas.io (opens in new window) for exact required-column lists.

Step 5 - Integration with retrieval frameworks

Ragas integrates with LangChain + LlamaIndex retrieval pipelines - the integration code captures contexts from the retriever and answer from the generator into the evaluation dataset automatically. Consult the per-framework integration docs on docs.ragas.io (opens in new window) when wiring; APIs evolve faster than this skill body and the canonical doc is the source of truth.

Step 6 - CI integration

Ragas does not ship a first-party CI action. Pattern: run evaluate() in a pytest fixture or a CLI script, compare per-metric scores against thresholds, fail CI on regression.

from ragas import evaluate
from ragas.metrics import faithfulness, answer_relevancy

result = evaluate(dataset, metrics=[faithfulness, answer_relevancy])
assert result["faithfulness"] >= 0.85
assert result["answer_relevancy"] >= 0.80

Anti-patterns

Anti-patternWhy it failsFix
Run all 30+ metrics on every PRCost + latency explodePick 3 - 5 metrics per pipeline (Step 3)
Faithfulness without contexts columnMetric returns NaN / errorsPass contexts per dataset spec (Step 4)
Pin nothingRagas + judge-model versions both driftPin both in requirements + CI env
Skip Aspect Critic for product-specific concernsBuilt-in metrics miss the requirementCustom Aspect Critic + rubric (Step 3)

Limitations

  • Many metrics require a judge LLM → cost scales with metric count × dataset size.
  • Multimodal metrics need the multimodal extras (pip install ragas[multimodal]); check the per-metric doc on docs.ragas.io (opens in new window).
  • API surface evolves - pin versions in requirements; the canonical doc is the source of truth (this skill body curates the mainstream patterns but does not re-litigate per-method signatures).

References

Source: docs.ragas.io/en/stable/concepts/metrics/available_metrics/ (opens in new window). Pick 3 - 5 metrics per pipeline; running all 30+ on every PR blows up cost and latency.

Retrieval Augmented Generation

MetricUse
Context PrecisionAre the relevant chunks ranked high in the retrieved context?
Context RecallDoes the retrieved context contain ground-truth info?
Context Entities RecallEntity-level recall vs ground truth
Noise SensitivityDoes irrelevant context degrade output quality?
Response RelevancyDoes the response address the question?
FaithfulnessAre the response's claims grounded in retrieved context?
Multimodal FaithfulnessFaithfulness for text+image RAG
Multimodal RelevanceRelevance for text+image RAG

Nvidia Metrics

MetricUse
Answer AccuracyNvidia-blessed accuracy scoring
Context RelevanceRelevance scoring with Nvidia methodology
Response GroundednessGroundedness in retrieved context

Agents/Tool Use

MetricUse
Topic AdherenceDoes the agent stay on topic?
Tool Call AccuracyDid it call the right tool?
Tool Call F1F1 score for tool selection
Agent Goal AccuracyDid the agent achieve the user's goal?

Natural Language Comparison

MetricUse
Factual CorrectnessCompares response facts vs ground truth
Semantic SimilarityEmbedding-based similarity to reference
Non LLM String SimilarityString-distance metrics (no LLM call)
BLEU Score / ROUGE Score / CHRF ScoreClassical NLP metrics
String PresenceToken presence check
Exact MatchStrict equality

SQL

MetricUse
Execution-based Datacompy ScoreRun query, compare result-sets
SQL Query EquivalenceSemantic equivalence (different SQL, same result)

General Purpose

MetricUse
Aspect CriticYes/no LLM-judge on a custom aspect
Simple Criteria ScoringNumeric scoring against a rubric
Rubrics-based ScoringMulti-criterion rubric scoring
Instance-specific Rubrics ScoringPer-row rubric variation

Other

MetricUse
SummarizationSummary quality scoring
  • New manager wants the whole metric catalogue wired into the PR gate by Friday
  • The analytics copilot gate fails 41 of 50 queries that return the right rows
  • Three branches all claim to fix the same three blank rows and I have to pick one
  • A tag we froze in June does not produce June's numbers any more
  • We went from 4 passages to 20 in August and HR has opened three tickets