iterate
Use when the workflow needs to self-correct, improve over time, or establish feedback loops and evaluation cycles.
How do I install this agent skill?
npx skills add https://github.com/sharpdeveye/maestro --skill iterateIs this agent skill safe to install?
- Gen Agent Trust Hubpass
This skill outlines best practices for implementing iteration and self-correction feedback loops within workflows. It provides conceptual design guidelines, quality criteria frameworks, evaluation strategies, and execution checklists. No security vulnerabilities, malicious patterns, or code components were identified.
- Socketpass
No alerts
- Snykpass
Risk: LOW · No issues
- ZeroLeakspass
Score: 93/100 · 2 sections analyzed
What does this agent skill do?
MANDATORY PREPARATION
Invoke /agent-workflow — it contains workflow principles, anti-patterns, and the Context Gathering Protocol. Follow the protocol before proceeding — if no workflow context exists yet, you MUST run /teach-maestro first.
Consult the feedback-loops reference in the agent-workflow skill for evaluation patterns and self-correction strategies.
Set up feedback loops that make workflows self-correcting and continuously improving. Iteration transforms one-shot gambles into convergent, reliable systems.
Feedback Loop Design
Step 1: Define Quality Criteria
What does "good output" look like? Score dimensions:
| Dimension | Weight | Threshold | Measurement |
|---|---|---|---|
| Accuracy | 0.4 | ≥ 0.8 | Factual correctness check |
| Completeness | 0.3 | ≥ 0.7 | Required fields present |
| Format | 0.2 | ≥ 0.9 | Schema compliance |
| Tone | 0.1 | ≥ 0.6 | Appropriate for audience |
Step 2: Choose Evaluator Type
Match evaluator to requirements:
- Rule-based: Schema validation, field presence, value ranges (fast, free)
- Self-check: Same model evaluates own output (fast, cheap, less reliable)
- Cross-model: Different model evaluates (slower, more reliable)
- Human-in-the-loop: Human review (slowest, most reliable, doesn't scale)
- Hybrid: Rules first, then model check for what rules can't catch
Step 3: Design the Correction Loop
generate(input) → evaluate(output) → score
if score ≥ threshold → return output
if score < threshold AND attempts < max →
enrich input with evaluator feedback
generate again (with feedback)
if attempts ≥ max → fallback or escalate
Critical: The retry input MUST be different from the original. Include:
- The evaluator's specific feedback
- What was wrong and why
- A suggestion for how to fix it
Step 4: Set Up Regression Detection
When changing prompts, models, or tools:
- Run golden test set with OLD config → baseline scores
- Run golden test set with NEW config → new scores
- Compare: improvement ≥ 5% → accept; regression ≥ 5% → reject
Step 5: Continuous Monitoring
For production workflows:
- Sample 1-5% of outputs for automated evaluation
- Track quality scores over time
- Alert on downward trends
- A/B test changes before full rollout
Iteration Checklist
- Quality criteria defined with weights and thresholds
- Evaluator selected and configured
- Correction loop has max attempts limit
- Feedback is injected into retries (not identical retry)
- Golden test set exists with ≥ 10 cases
- Regression detection configured for changes
- Production monitoring in place
Recommended Next Step
After setting up feedback loops, run /evaluate to validate the loop with real scenarios, then /refine for final polish.
NEVER:
- Retry with the exact same input (definition of insanity)
- Use the same weak model to both generate and evaluate
- Skip the max attempts limit (infinite loops are real)
- Deploy changes without regression testing against golden set
- Monitor only errors — track quality scores over time
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/sharpdeveye/maestro/iterate">View iterate on skillZs</a>