ragas-evaluation
Authors and runs Ragas - RAG-pipeline evaluation framework with metrics organized into RAG (Faithfulness, Response Relevancy, Context Precision/Recall, Context Entities Recall, Noise Sensitivity), Natural Language Comparison (Factual Correctness, Semantic Similarity, BLEU/ROUGE/CHRF/Exact Match), Agents/Tool-Use (Topic Adherence, Tool Call Accuracy/F1, Agent Goal Accuracy), General Purpose (Aspect Critic, Rubrics-based Scoring), Nvidia (Answer Accuracy, Context Relevance, Response Groundedness), and Summarization. Use when the user evaluates a RAG pipeline (retriever + generator) and needs the deepest metric variety in the OSS LLM-eval space.
Install with skills.sh (any agent)
npx skills add testland/qa --skill ragas-evaluationragas-evaluation
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
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 ragasOr from source:
pip install git+https://github.com/explodinggradients/ragasStep 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:
| Column | Required by |
|---|---|
question | All RAG metrics |
answer | Response Relevancy, Faithfulness, NL Comparison |
contexts (list of strings) | Context Precision/Recall, Faithfulness |
ground_truth | Context Recall, Factual Correctness, Answer Accuracy |
reference_contexts | Context-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"] >= 0.80Anti-patterns
| Anti-pattern | Why it fails | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| Run all 30+ metrics on every PR | Cost + latency explode | Pick 3 - 5 metrics per pipeline (Step 3) |
Faithfulness without contexts column | Metric returns NaN / errors | Pass contexts per dataset spec (Step 4) |
| Pin nothing | Ragas + judge-model versions both drift | Pin both in requirements + CI env |
| Skip Aspect Critic for product-specific concerns | Built-in metrics miss the requirement | Custom Aspect Critic + rubric (Step 3) |
Limitations
References
Ragas built-in metric catalog
View source (opens in new window)Ragas built-in metric catalog
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
| Metric | Use |
|---|---|
| Context Precision | Are the relevant chunks ranked high in the retrieved context? |
| Context Recall | Does the retrieved context contain ground-truth info? |
| Context Entities Recall | Entity-level recall vs ground truth |
| Noise Sensitivity | Does irrelevant context degrade output quality? |
| Response Relevancy | Does the response address the question? |
| Faithfulness | Are the response's claims grounded in retrieved context? |
| Multimodal Faithfulness | Faithfulness for text+image RAG |
| Multimodal Relevance | Relevance for text+image RAG |
Nvidia Metrics
| Metric | Use |
|---|---|
| Answer Accuracy | Nvidia-blessed accuracy scoring |
| Context Relevance | Relevance scoring with Nvidia methodology |
| Response Groundedness | Groundedness in retrieved context |
Agents/Tool Use
| Metric | Use |
|---|---|
| Topic Adherence | Does the agent stay on topic? |
| Tool Call Accuracy | Did it call the right tool? |
| Tool Call F1 | F1 score for tool selection |
| Agent Goal Accuracy | Did the agent achieve the user's goal? |
Natural Language Comparison
| Metric | Use |
|---|---|
| Factual Correctness | Compares response facts vs ground truth |
| Semantic Similarity | Embedding-based similarity to reference |
| Non LLM String Similarity | String-distance metrics (no LLM call) |
| BLEU Score / ROUGE Score / CHRF Score | Classical NLP metrics |
| String Presence | Token presence check |
| Exact Match | Strict equality |
SQL
| Metric | Use |
|---|---|
| Execution-based Datacompy Score | Run query, compare result-sets |
| SQL Query Equivalence | Semantic equivalence (different SQL, same result) |
General Purpose
| Metric | Use |
|---|---|
| Aspect Critic | Yes/no LLM-judge on a custom aspect |
| Simple Criteria Scoring | Numeric scoring against a rubric |
| Rubrics-based Scoring | Multi-criterion rubric scoring |
| Instance-specific Rubrics Scoring | Per-row rubric variation |
Other
| Metric | Use |
|---|---|
| Summarization | Summary quality scoring |
Related skills
deepeval-evaluation
Authors and runs DeepEval - pytest-native LLM eval framework with `LLMTestCase` (input + actual_output + expected_output + retrieval_context) and ~11 built-in metrics (G-Eval, Answer-Relevancy, Faithfulness, Contextual-Recall / Precision / Relevancy, Hallucination, Bias, Toxicity, Summarization, JSON-Correctness); runs via `deepeval test run {file.py}` with `assert_test()` per test or `evaluate()` for batch; integrates Confident-AI dashboard. Use when the user prefers pytest workflow, works with RAG and needs faithfulness/contextual metrics out-of-the-box, or wants a managed dashboard.
giskard-llm
Authors and runs Giskard LLM scans - adversarial test-case generation for LLM applications via `giskard.scan(model)` covering 7 vulnerability categories (hallucination, harmful_content, prompt_injection, sensitive_information_disclosure, stereotypes, robustness, basic_sycophancy); wraps any callable model behind `giskard.Model(model_predict, model_type="text_generation", ...)`; emits HTML report. Use when the user needs adversarial / red-team coverage on top of functional eval suites.
langfuse-tracing
Wires Langfuse tracing into LLM apps for production observability, monitoring, telemetry, and offline eval - instruments via `@observe` (Python) / `startActiveObservation` (TS) decorators that auto-capture inputs / outputs / timings / errors per generation; exposes `langfuse.update_current_span()` for metadata + cost / latency annotation; supports trace-bound scoring for eval datasets and prompt-as-code management. Use when the user needs to monitor, log, trace, or debug LLM API calls in production beyond pre-deploy eval, wants to add LLM observability tooling to an existing app, or wants to ship traces from production to an eval dataset for offline regression testing.
llm-eval-anti-patterns
Audits an existing LLM evaluation suite for eight methodology errors that make its numbers untrustworthy: too few cases per capability, single-provider lock-in, exact-match assertions on open-ended output, no semantic-similarity check on paraphrase-tolerant output, no baseline comparison in CI, no cost or latency ceiling, unpinned model identifiers, and no adversarial coverage. Supplies harness-neutral detection cues, the reason each error invalidates the result, a concrete fix, a Critical/Warning/Info severity scheme, and a findings-table output shape. Covers validating an LLM judge against human labels before its verdicts count as evidence. Use when an eval suite already exists and its pass rate is about to gate a release, a model swap, or a prompt change, and nobody has audited how the suite itself was built.
llm-regression-suite-author
Builds a versioned golden-dataset LLM regression suite for tracking quality across model upgrades: structures a versioned JSONL/CSV golden dataset, configures deterministic eval runs (temperature 0, seed), wires assertion layers (exact, semantic similarity, LLM-as-judge, rubric), enforces a pass-rate threshold with diff reporting vs the baseline model, and gates CI on regression. Use when upgrading an LLM provider model and needing a repeatable before/after quality gate, or when a prompt regression suite must track output quality across model versions over time.
openai-evals
Authors and runs OpenAI Evals - Python framework + registry for evaluating LLMs and LLM-backed systems with `oaieval {model} {eval-name}` CLI; supports template-based evals (Match / Includes / FuzzyMatch / ModelBasedClassify) defined in `evals/registry/evals/*.yaml` against JSONL data files in `evals/registry/data/`, plus custom Python eval classes implementing the Eval interface. Use when the user works with the openai/evals repo, needs the OpenAI-curated eval registry, or contributes new evals via PR to the registry.
promptfoo-evaluation
Authors and runs Promptfoo evals for LLM prompts and RAG pipelines - wires `promptfooconfig.yaml` providers + prompts + tests + assertions (deterministic `equals` / `contains` / `is-json` / `regex`, semantic `similar`, model-graded `llm-rubric` / `factuality` / `g-eval`, performance `latency` / `cost`, custom `javascript` / `python`), runs `npx promptfoo eval`, views HTML report via `promptfoo view`, and integrates CI for regression gating. Use when the user runs Promptfoo, asks about prompt regression suites, or needs an eval-driven workflow for LLM-backed features.