adk-eval-guide
MUST READ before running any ADK evaluation. ADK evaluation methodology — eval metrics, evalset schema, LLM-as-judge, tool trajectory scoring, and common failure causes. Use when evaluating agent quality, running adk eval, or debugging eval results. Do NOT use for API code patterns (use adk-cheatsheet), deployment (use adk-deploy-guide), or project scaffolding (use adk-scaffold).
How do I install this agent skill?
npx skills add https://github.com/google/adk-docs --skill adk-eval-guideIs this agent skill safe to install?
- Gen Agent Trust Hubpass
This skill provides comprehensive documentation and reference guides for the Agent Development Kit (ADK) evaluation framework. It covers evaluation metrics, configuration schemas, and multimodal evaluation strategies. The analysis found no security issues, as the referenced patterns and tools are standard for the development ecosystem.
- Socketpass
No alerts
- Snykpass
Risk: LOW · No issues
- Runlayerwarn
1/5 files flagged
- ZeroLeakspass
Score: 93/100 · 2 sections analyzed
What does this agent skill do?
ADK Evaluation Guide
Scaffolded project? If you used
/adk-scaffold, you already havemake eval,tests/eval/evalsets/, andtests/eval/eval_config.json. Start withmake evaland iterate from there.Non-scaffolded? Use
adk evaldirectly — see Running Evaluations below.
Reference Files
| File | Contents |
|---|---|
references/criteria-guide.md | Complete metrics reference — all 8 criteria, match types, custom metrics, judge model config |
references/user-simulation.md | Dynamic conversation testing — ConversationScenario, user simulator config, compatible metrics |
references/builtin-tools-eval.md | google_search and model-internal tools — trajectory behavior, metric compatibility |
references/multimodal-eval.md | Multimodal inputs — evalset schema, built-in metric limitations, custom evaluator pattern |
The Eval-Fix Loop
Evaluation is iterative. When a score is below threshold, diagnose the cause, fix it, rerun — don't just report the failure.
How to iterate
- Start small: Begin with 1-2 eval cases, not the full suite
- Run eval:
make eval(oradk evalif no Makefile) - Read the scores — identify what failed and why
- Fix the code — adjust prompts, tool logic, instructions, or the evalset
- Rerun eval — verify the fix worked
- Repeat steps 3-5 until the case passes
- Only then add more eval cases and expand coverage
Expect 5-10+ iterations. This is normal — each iteration makes the agent better.
What to fix when scores fail
| Failure | What to change |
|---|---|
tool_trajectory_avg_score low | Fix agent instructions (tool ordering), update evalset tool_uses, or switch to IN_ORDER/ANY_ORDER match type |
response_match_score low | Adjust agent instruction wording, or relax the expected response |
final_response_match_v2 low | Refine agent instructions, or adjust expected response — this is semantic, not lexical |
rubric_based score low | Refine agent instructions to address the specific rubric that failed |
hallucinations_v1 low | Tighten agent instructions to stay grounded in tool output |
| Agent calls wrong tools | Fix tool descriptions, agent instructions, or tool_config |
| Agent calls extra tools | Use IN_ORDER/ANY_ORDER match type, add strict stop instructions, or switch to rubric_based_tool_use_quality_v1 |
Choosing the Right Criteria
| Goal | Recommended Metric |
|---|---|
| Regression testing / CI/CD (fast, deterministic) | tool_trajectory_avg_score + response_match_score |
| Semantic response correctness (flexible phrasing OK) | final_response_match_v2 |
| Response quality without reference answer | rubric_based_final_response_quality_v1 |
| Validate tool usage reasoning | rubric_based_tool_use_quality_v1 |
| Detect hallucinated claims | hallucinations_v1 |
| Safety compliance | safety_v1 |
| Dynamic multi-turn conversations | User simulation + hallucinations_v1 / safety_v1 (see references/user-simulation.md) |
| Multimodal input (image, audio, file) | tool_trajectory_avg_score + custom metric for response quality (see references/multimodal-eval.md) |
For the complete metrics reference with config examples, match types, and custom metrics, see references/criteria-guide.md.
Running Evaluations
# Scaffolded projects:
make eval EVALSET=tests/eval/evalsets/my_evalset.json
# Or directly via ADK CLI:
adk eval ./app <path_to_evalset.json> --config_file_path=<path_to_config.json> --print_detailed_results
# Run specific eval cases from a set:
adk eval ./app my_evalset.json:eval_1,eval_2
# With GCS storage:
adk eval ./app my_evalset.json --eval_storage_uri gs://my-bucket/evals
CLI options: --config_file_path, --print_detailed_results, --eval_storage_uri, --log_level
Eval set management:
adk eval_set create <agent_path> <eval_set_id>
adk eval_set add_eval_case <agent_path> <eval_set_id> --scenarios_file <path> --session_input_file <path>
Configuration Schema (eval_config.json)
Both camelCase and snake_case field names are accepted (Pydantic aliases). The examples below use snake_case, matching the official ADK docs.
Full example
{
"criteria": {
"tool_trajectory_avg_score": {
"threshold": 1.0,
"match_type": "IN_ORDER"
},
"final_response_match_v2": {
"threshold": 0.8,
"judge_model_options": {
"judge_model": "gemini-2.5-flash",
"num_samples": 5
}
},
"rubric_based_final_response_quality_v1": {
"threshold": 0.8,
"rubrics": [
{
"rubric_id": "professionalism",
"rubric_content": { "text_property": "The response must be professional and helpful." }
},
{
"rubric_id": "safety",
"rubric_content": { "text_property": "The agent must NEVER book without asking for confirmation." }
}
]
}
}
}
Simple threshold shorthand is also valid: "response_match_score": 0.8
For custom metrics, judge_model_options details, and user_simulator_config, see references/criteria-guide.md.
EvalSet Schema (evalset.json)
{
"eval_set_id": "my_eval_set",
"name": "My Eval Set",
"description": "Tests core capabilities",
"eval_cases": [
{
"eval_id": "search_test",
"conversation": [
{
"invocation_id": "inv_1",
"user_content": { "parts": [{ "text": "Find a flight to NYC" }] },
"final_response": {
"role": "model",
"parts": [{ "text": "I found a flight for $500. Want to book?" }]
},
"intermediate_data": {
"tool_uses": [
{ "name": "search_flights", "args": { "destination": "NYC" } }
],
"intermediate_responses": [
["sub_agent_name", [{ "text": "Found 3 flights to NYC." }]]
]
}
}
],
"session_input": { "app_name": "my_app", "user_id": "user_1", "state": {} }
}
]
}
Key fields:
intermediate_data.tool_uses— expected tool call trajectory (chronological order)intermediate_data.intermediate_responses— expected sub-agent responses (for multi-agent systems)session_input.state— initial session state (overrides Python-level initialization)conversation_scenario— alternative toconversationfor user simulation (seereferences/user-simulation.md)
Common Gotchas
The Proactivity Trajectory Gap
LLMs often perform extra actions not asked for (e.g., google_search after save_preferences). This causes tool_trajectory_avg_score failures with EXACT match. Solutions:
- Use
IN_ORDERorANY_ORDERmatch type — tolerates extra tool calls between expected ones - Include ALL tools the agent might call in your expected trajectory
- Use
rubric_based_tool_use_quality_v1instead of trajectory matching - Add strict stop instructions: "Stop after calling save_preferences. Do NOT search."
Multi-turn conversations require tool_uses for ALL turns
The tool_trajectory_avg_score evaluates each invocation. If you don't specify expected tool calls for intermediate turns, the evaluation will fail even if the agent called the right tools.
{
"conversation": [
{
"invocation_id": "inv_1",
"user_content": { "parts": [{"text": "Find me a flight from NYC to London"}] },
"intermediate_data": {
"tool_uses": [
{ "name": "search_flights", "args": {"origin": "NYC", "destination": "LON"} }
]
}
},
{
"invocation_id": "inv_2",
"user_content": { "parts": [{"text": "Book the first option"}] },
"final_response": { "role": "model", "parts": [{"text": "Booking confirmed!"}] },
"intermediate_data": {
"tool_uses": [
{ "name": "book_flight", "args": {"flight_id": "1"} }
]
}
}
]
}
App name must match directory name
The App object's name parameter MUST match the directory containing your agent:
# CORRECT - matches the "app" directory
app = App(root_agent=root_agent, name="app")
# WRONG - causes "Session not found" errors
app = App(root_agent=root_agent, name="flight_booking_assistant")
The before_agent_callback Pattern (State Initialization)
Always use a callback to initialize session state variables used in your instruction template. This prevents KeyError crashes on the first turn:
async def initialize_state(callback_context: CallbackContext) -> None:
state = callback_context.state
if "user_preferences" not in state:
state["user_preferences"] = {}
root_agent = Agent(
name="my_agent",
before_agent_callback=initialize_state,
instruction="Based on preferences: {user_preferences}...",
)
Eval-State Overrides (Type Mismatch Danger)
Be careful with session_input.state in your evalset. It overrides Python-level initialization:
// WRONG — initializes feedback_history as a string, breaks .append()
"state": { "feedback_history": "" }
// CORRECT — matches the Python type (list)
"state": { "feedback_history": [] }
// NOTE: Remove these // comments before using — JSON does not support comments.
Model thinking mode may bypass tools
Models with "thinking" enabled may skip tool calls. Use tool_config with mode="ANY" to force tool usage, or switch to a non-thinking model for predictable tool calling.
Common Eval Failure Causes
| Symptom | Cause | Fix |
|---|---|---|
Missing tool_uses in intermediate turns | Trajectory expects match per invocation | Add expected tool calls to all turns |
| Agent mentions data not in tool output | Hallucination | Tighten agent instructions; add hallucinations_v1 metric |
| "Session not found" error | App name mismatch | Ensure App name matches directory name |
| Score fluctuates between runs | Non-deterministic model | Set temperature=0 or use rubric-based eval |
tool_trajectory_avg_score always 0 | Agent uses google_search (model-internal) | Remove trajectory metric; see references/builtin-tools-eval.md |
| Trajectory fails but tools are correct | Extra tools called | Switch to IN_ORDER/ANY_ORDER match type |
| LLM judge ignores image/audio in eval | get_text_from_content() skips non-text parts | Use custom metric with vision-capable judge (see references/multimodal-eval.md) |
Deep Dive: ADK Docs
For the official evaluation documentation, fetch these pages:
- Evaluation overview:
https://adk.dev/evaluate/index.md - Criteria reference:
https://adk.dev/evaluate/criteria/index.md - User simulation:
https://adk.dev/evaluate/user-sim/index.md
Debugging Example
User says: "tool_trajectory_avg_score is 0, what's wrong?"
- Check if agent uses
google_search— if so, seereferences/builtin-tools-eval.md - Check if using
EXACTmatch and agent calls extra tools — tryIN_ORDER - Compare expected
tool_usesin evalset with actual agent behavior - Fix mismatch (update evalset or agent instructions)
How can the creator link this skill?
Add the canonical catalog link to the repository README so users can inspect current installs and available audits. The publishing guide covers the complete discovery path.
<a href="https://skillzs.dev/skills/google/adk-docs/adk-eval-guide">View adk-eval-guide on skillZs</a>