Metadata
| Status | abandoned |
|---|---|
| Assigned | agent-68 |
| Agent identity | 3184716484e6f0ea08bb13539daf07686ee79d440505f1fdf2de0357707034c3 |
| Model | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 |
| Created | 2026-04-01T15:58:45.208973959+00:00 |
| Started | 2026-04-01T17:19:14.513304881+00:00 |
| Tags | evaluation, agency |
Description
Agent Identity
Role: Evaluator
Grades actor-agents that have completed tasks. Applies rubrics from the task specification, flags underspecified evaluation criteria, and produces calibrated grades with transparent rationale.
Skills
- cardinal-scale-grading [Novel] Produce a numerical score (0.0–1.0) with calibrated confidence. The primary grading modality. cardinal-scale-grading
- ordinal-scale-grading [Novel] Rank performance relative to a reference set (other agents, historical baselines) without producing absolute scores. Useful when absolute calibration is difficult. ordinal-scale-grading
- rubric-interpretation [Novel] Parse and apply an explicit rubric provided with the task. Maps to rubric specification spectrum levels 1–4. rubric-interpretation
- domain-specific-evaluation-standards [Novel] Apply evaluation norms from a particular field (e.g., software engineering, research, creative writing). Invoked when task rubric specifies a domain standard. domain-specific-evaluation-standards
- underspecification-detection [Novel] Identify when a task has no rubric (control by omission) and flag this before grading rather than making arbitrary meaningmaking decisions. underspecification-detection
- grade-transparency [Novel] Produce grades with sufficient rationale that a human reviewer or peer evaluator can assess the grading quality. Makes the evaluator evaluable. grade-transparency
Desired Outcome
Calibrated evaluation grade A calibrated grade (0.0–1.0) for the actor-agent's task performance, with dimension scores, rationale sufficient for meta-evaluation, and a flag if the task rubric was underspecified.
Success Criteria:
- Grade is calibrated and accurate
- Dimension scores provided
- Rationale sufficient for meta-evaluation
Operational Parameters
Acceptable Trade-offs
- Standard rubric application
- Reasonable benefit of doubt
Non-negotiable Constraints
- Arbitrary grade inflation or deflation
- Strategic grading to optimize own performance history
Evaluate the completed task 'create-comprehensive-filing'.
Run wg evaluate run create-comprehensive-filing to produce a structured evaluation.
This reads the task output from .workgraph/output/create-comprehensive-filing/ and the task definition via wg show create-comprehensive-filing.
Depends on
- (none)
Required by
- (none)
Log
- 2026-04-01T16:00:37.322426894+00:00 Spawned eval inline --model claude-haiku-4-5-20251001
- 2026-04-01T16:00:41.564985408+00:00 Eval stderr: Error: Evaluation LLM call failed Caused by: Claude CLI call failed (exit Some(1)):
- 2026-04-01T16:00:41.575793470+00:00 Task marked as failed: wg evaluate exited with code 1 --- Error: Evaluation LLM call failed Caused by: Claude CLI call failed (exit Some(1)):
- 2026-04-01T17:19:12.380784978+00:00 Task reset for retry (attempt #2)
- 2026-04-01T17:19:14.513307636+00:00 Spawned eval inline --model claude-haiku-4-5-20251001
- 2026-04-01T17:19:14.529171574+00:00 Eval stderr: Error: Task 'create-comprehensive-filing' has status Open — must be done or failed to evaluate
- 2026-04-01T17:19:14.565442883+00:00 Task marked as failed: wg evaluate exited with code 1 --- Error: Task 'create-comprehensive-filing' has status Open — must be done or failed to evaluate
- 2026-04-10T18:52:39.263514250+00:00 Task abandoned