ReddRadar
Agent skill
openjudge
Build custom LLM evaluation pipelines using the OpenJudge framework. Covers selecting and configuring graders (LLM-based, function-based, agentic), running batch evaluations with GradingRunner, combining scores with aggregators, applying evaluation strategies (voting, average), auto-generating graders from data, and analyzing results (pairwise win rates, statistics, validation metrics). Use when the user wants to evaluate LLM outputs, compare multiple models, design scoring criteria, or build an automated evaluation system.
Install this agent skill to your Project
npx add-skill https://github.com/agentscope-ai/OpenJudge/tree/main/skills/openjudge
SKILL.md
OpenJudge Skill
Build evaluation pipelines for LLM applications using the openjudge library.
When to Use This Skill
- User wants to evaluate LLM output quality (correctness, relevance, hallucination, etc.)
- User wants to compare two or more models and rank them
- User wants to design a scoring rubric and automate evaluation
- User wants to analyze evaluation results statistically
- User wants to build a reward model or quality filter
Sub-documents — Read When Relevant
| Topic | File | Read when… |
|---|---|---|
| Grader selection & configuration | graders.md |
User needs to pick or configure an evaluator |
| Batch evaluation pipeline | pipeline.md |
User needs to run evaluation over a dataset |
| Auto-generate graders from data | generator.md |
No rubric yet; generate from labeled examples |
| Analyze & compare results | analyzer.md |
User wants win rates, statistics, or metrics |
Read the relevant sub-document before writing any code.
Install
pip install py-openjudge
Architecture Overview
Dataset (List[dict])
│
▼
GradingRunner ← orchestrates everything
│
├─► Grader A ──► EvaluationStrategy ──► _aevaluate() ──► GraderScore / GraderRank
├─► Grader B ──► EvaluationStrategy ──► _aevaluate() ──► GraderScore / GraderRank
└─► Grader C ...
│
├─► Aggregator (optional) ← combine multiple grader scores into one
│
└─► RunnerResult ← {grader_name: [GraderScore, ...]}
│
▼
Analyzer ← statistics, win rates, validation metrics
5-Minute Quick Start
Evaluate responses for correctness using a built-in grader:
import asyncio
from openjudge.models.openai_chat_model import OpenAIChatModel
from openjudge.graders.common.correctness import CorrectnessGrader
from openjudge.runner.grading_runner import GradingRunner
# 1. Configure the judge model (OpenAI-compatible endpoint)
model = OpenAIChatModel(
model="qwen-plus",
api_key="sk-xxx",
base_url="https://dashscope.aliyuncs.com/compatible-mode/v1",
)
# 2. Instantiate a grader
grader = CorrectnessGrader(model=model)
# 3. Prepare dataset
dataset = [
{
"query": "What is the capital of France?",
"response": "Paris is the capital of France.",
"reference_response": "Paris.",
},
{
"query": "What is 2 + 2?",
"response": "The answer is five.",
"reference_response": "4.",
},
]
# 4. Run evaluation
async def main():
runner = GradingRunner(
grader_configs={"correctness": grader},
max_concurrency=8,
)
results = await runner.arun(dataset)
for i, result in enumerate(results["correctness"]):
print(f"[{i}] score={result.score} reason={result.reason}")
asyncio.run(main())
Expected output:
[0] score=5 reason=The response accurately states Paris as capital...
[1] score=1 reason=The response gives the wrong answer (five vs 4)...
Key Data Types
| Type | Description |
|---|---|
GraderScore |
Pointwise result: .score (float), .reason (str), .metadata (dict) |
GraderRank |
Listwise result: .rank (List[int]), .reason (str), .metadata (dict) |
GraderError |
Error during evaluation: .error (str), .reason (str) |
RunnerResult |
Dict[str, List[GraderResult]] — keyed by grader name |
Result Handling Pattern
from openjudge.graders.schema import GraderScore, GraderRank, GraderError
for grader_name, grader_results in results.items():
for i, result in enumerate(grader_results):
if isinstance(result, GraderScore):
print(f"{grader_name}[{i}]: score={result.score}")
elif isinstance(result, GraderRank):
print(f"{grader_name}[{i}]: rank={result.rank}")
elif isinstance(result, GraderError):
print(f"{grader_name}[{i}]: ERROR — {result.error}")
Model Configuration
All LLM-based graders accept either a BaseChatModel instance or a dict config:
# Option A: instance
from openjudge.models.openai_chat_model import OpenAIChatModel
model = OpenAIChatModel(model="gpt-4o", api_key="sk-...")
# Option B: dict (auto-creates OpenAIChatModel)
model_cfg = {"model": "gpt-4o", "api_key": "sk-..."}
grader = CorrectnessGrader(model=model_cfg)
# OpenAI-compatible endpoints (DashScope / local / etc.)
model = OpenAIChatModel(
model="qwen-plus",
api_key="sk-xxx",
base_url="https://dashscope.aliyuncs.com/compatible-mode/v1",
)
Recommended Agent Skills
Expand your agent's capabilities with these related and highly-rated skills.
agentscope-ai/OpenJudge
ref-hallucination-arena
Benchmark LLM reference recommendation capabilities by verifying every cited paper against Crossref, PubMed, arXiv, and DBLP. Measures hallucination rate, per-field accuracy (title/author/year/DOI), discipline breakdown, and year constraint compliance. Supports tool-augmented (ReAct + web search) mode. Use when the user asks to evaluate, benchmark, or compare models on academic reference hallucination, literature recommendation quality, or citation accuracy.
agentscope-ai/OpenJudge
bib-verify
Verify a BibTeX file for hallucinated or fabricated references by cross-checking every entry against CrossRef, arXiv, and DBLP. Reports each reference as verified, suspect, or not found, with field-level mismatch details (title, authors, year, DOI). Use when the user wants to check a .bib file for fake citations, validate references in a paper, or audit bibliography entries for accuracy.
agentscope-ai/OpenJudge
auto-arena
Automatically evaluate and compare multiple AI models or agents without pre-existing test data. Generates test queries from a task description, collects responses from all target endpoints, auto-generates evaluation rubrics, runs pairwise comparisons via a judge model, and produces win-rate rankings with reports and charts. Supports checkpoint resume, incremental endpoint addition, and judge model hot-swap. Use when the user asks to compare, benchmark, or rank multiple models or agents on a custom task, or run an arena-style evaluation.
agentscope-ai/OpenJudge
paper-review
Review academic papers for correctness, quality, and novelty using OpenJudge's multi-stage pipeline. Supports PDF files and LaTeX source packages (.tar.gz/.zip). Covers 10 disciplines: cs, medicine, physics, chemistry, biology, economics, psychology, environmental_science, mathematics, social_sciences. Use when the user asks to review, evaluate, critique, or assess a research paper, check references, or verify a BibTeX file.
agentscope-ai/OpenJudge
claude-authenticity
Detect whether an API endpoint is backed by genuine Claude (not a wrapper, proxy, or impersonator) using 9 weighted rule-based checks that mirror the claude-verify project. Also extracts injected system prompts from providers that override Claude's identity. Fully self-contained — copy the code below and run, no extra packages beyond httpx. Use when the user wants to verify a Claude API key or endpoint, check if a third-party Claude service is authentic, audit API providers for Claude authenticity, test multiple models in parallel, or discover what system prompt a provider has injected.
agentscope-ai/OpenJudge
rl-reward
Build RL reward signals using the OpenJudge framework. Covers choosing between pointwise and pairwise reward strategies based on RL algorithm, task type, and cost; aggregating multi-dimensional pointwise scores into a scalar reward; pairwise tournament reward for GRPO on subjective tasks (net win rate across group rollouts); generating preference pairs for DPO/RLAIF; and normalizing scores for training stability. Use when building reward models, scoring rollouts for GRPO/REINFORCE, generating preference data for DPO, or doing Best-of-N selection.
Didn't find tool you were looking for?