Prompt testing
Skill fusengine/agents/plugins/prompt-engineer/skills/prompt-testing
Redefining development through cognitive automation and collaborative agent systems.
npx -y skills add fusengine/agents --skill prompt-testingAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 22 stars22 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Use when comparing two prompt variants, defining quality/efficiency/robustness metrics, or deciding whether to adopt a challenger prompt over a baseline.
SKILL.md
4.0 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
The adoption decision is rule-based: adopt B if its accuracy is at least equal with acceptable token cost, consider B as a trade-off if accuracy improves >10% despite <20% token regression, otherwise keep A or iterate. Requires a minimum of 20 test cases with 15-20% edge cases for statistical significance. </objective>
Prompt Testing
Skill for testing, comparing, and measuring prompt performance.
References
- metrics.md - Load when: defining or scoring Quality/Efficiency/Robustness/UX metrics with thresholds and calculation formulas
- methodology.md - Load when: running a full A/B test (hypothesis, dataset sizing, statistical significance, common pitfalls)
- templates.md - Load when: writing a test dataset JSON or an A/B test report
Testing Workflow
1. DEFINE
└── Test objective
└── Metrics to measure
└── Success criteria
2. PREPARE
└── Variants A and B
└── Test dataset
└── Baseline (if existing)
3. EXECUTE
└── Run on dataset
└── Collect results
└── Document observations
4. ANALYZE
└── Calculate metrics
└── Compare variants
└── Identify patterns
5. DECIDE
└── Recommendation
└── Statistical confidence
└── Next iterations
Performance Metrics
Quality
| Metric | Description | Calculation |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy | Correct responses | Correct / Total |
| Compliance | Format adherence | Compliant / Total |
| Consistency | Response stability | 1 - Variance |
| Relevance | Meeting the need | Average score (1-5) |
Efficiency
| Metric | Description | Calculation |
|---|---|---|
| Tokens Input | Prompt size | Token count |
| Tokens Output | Response size | Token count |
| Latency | Response time | ms |
| Cost | Price per request | Tokens × Price |
Robustness
| Metric | Description | Calculation |
|---|---|---|
| Edge Cases | Edge case handling | Passed / Total |
| Jailbreak Resist | Bypass resistance | Blocked / Attempts |
| Error Recovery | Error recovery | Recovered / Errors |
For full definitions, thresholds, and the UX metrics category, see metrics.md. For the test dataset and report formats, see templates.md.
Commands
# Create a test
/prompt test create --name "Test v1" --dataset tests.json
# Run an A/B test
/prompt test run --a prompt_a.md --b prompt_b.md --dataset tests.json
# View results
/prompt test results --id test_001
# Compare two tests
/prompt test compare --tests test_001,test_002
Decision Criteria
When to adopt variant B?
IF:
- Accuracy B >= Accuracy A
AND (Tokens B <= Tokens A * 1.1 OR accuracy improvement > 5%)
AND no regression on edge cases
THEN:
→ Adopt B
ELSE IF:
- Accuracy improvement > 10%
AND token regression < 20%
THEN:
→ Consider B (acceptable trade-off)
ELSE:
→ Keep A or iterate
Best Practices
- Minimum 20 test cases for significance
- Include edge cases (15-20% of dataset)
- Test multiple runs for consistency
- Document hypotheses before testing
- Version the prompts being tested