AI/TLDR

agent-eval

Measure how well coding agents actually use your library

Benchmark HarnessesOpen source
Updated
18 Jun 2026
Language
Python
License
Apache-2.0
Coverage
1 story
$git clone https://github.com/huggingface/is-it-agentic-enough

What's new

18 Jun 2026

Hugging Face published agent-eval and the accompanying write-up, measuring coding agents on library use across the bare, clone and skill access tiers rather than task completion alone.

Latest news

Overview

agent-eval, from Hugging Face's `is-it-agentic-enough` repository, asks a question ordinary code benchmarks skip: not "did the agent finish the task" but "how did it use your library to get there". It runs the same task set across models and library revisions and records the shape of the interaction — whether the agent reached for the CLI or hand-wrote Python, how many tokens it burned, how long it took, and how often it errored.

Tasks are run under three access tiers so you can see what documentation is worth. `bare` gives the agent nothing beyond the model's own knowledge, `clone` puts the repository in the working directory, and `skill` hands it a packaged Skill. Comparing the tiers on the same tasks is the experiment: if the skill tier does not move the numbers, the skill is not earning its place.

A run is described by a YAML matrix — profile, tasks, number of runs, hardware flavor, models and library revisions — and `agent-eval batch` launches it as Hugging Face Jobs. Results come back as a static HTML report with match percentage, median time, median tokens, error rate, label adoption (CLI versus `pipeline()`), per-run distributions and a task-by-revision coverage heatmap. Traces can be synced to a Hugging Face bucket or packaged into a dataset. It is Apache-2.0 and targets Python 3.13.

What it does

  • Measures token cost, wall-clock time, error rate and usage style alongside plain correctness
  • Three access tiers — bare, clone and skill — so you can quantify what your docs or Skill are worth
  • YAML matrix over models × library revisions, launched as Hugging Face Jobs
  • Static HTML reports with per-run distributions and a task × revision coverage heatmap
  • Trace sync to a Hugging Face bucket and packaging of runs into a dataset

Getting started

agent-eval installs from source with uv. You supply the tasks and a YAML matrix describing what to run.

Install

Clone the repo and install it into a Python 3.13 environment.

bashbash
git clone https://github.com/huggingface/is-it-agentic-enough
cd is-it-agentic-enough
uv venv --python 3.13 .env
uv pip install --python .env/bin/python -e .

Launch a matrix

The YAML file names the profile, tasks, run count, hardware flavor, models and library revisions to sweep.

bashbash
agent-eval batch matrix.yaml

Build the report and keep the traces

`report` renders the static HTML; `sync` mirrors results to or from a Hugging Face bucket and `upload` packages the traces as a dataset.

bashbash
agent-eval report <profile>
agent-eval sync
agent-eval upload <repo>

Commands and code are distilled from the project's own documentation — always check the official repo for the latest.

When to use it

  • Find out whether a coding agent can drive your library at all before you write more docs for it
  • Compare library revisions to see whether an API change made agents faster or more error-prone
  • Decide if a packaged Skill earns its maintenance by comparing the skill tier against bare and clone
  • Compare models on the same library rather than on a generic coding benchmark

How agent-eval compares

agent-eval alongside other open-source benchmark harnesses tools AI/TLDR tracks, ranked by GitHub stars.

ToolStarsWhat it does
LM Evaluation Harness★ 14kEleutherAI's framework for few-shot evaluation of language models across 60+ academic benchmarks, used as the backend for many leaderboards.
OpenCompass★ 7.5kAn LLM evaluation platform that runs models against 100+ datasets covering reasoning, knowledge, coding, and domain tasks, with leaderboards and multi-model support.
SWE-bench★ 5.9kA benchmark and containerized harness that tests whether language models can resolve real GitHub issues by generating patches that pass a repository's tests.
simple-evals★ 4.6kOpenAI's lightweight library for running standard zero-shot, chain-of-thought benchmarks like MMLU, MATH, and GPQA to measure model accuracy.
lmms-eval★ 4.4kAn evaluation suite for large multimodal models that runs image, video, and audio benchmarks across many tasks with a unified, reproducible interface.
AgentBench★ 3.7kA benchmark that evaluates LLMs as agents across diverse interactive environments such as operating systems, databases, web browsing, and games.
HELM★ 2.9kStanford CRFM's Holistic Evaluation of Language Models framework for reproducible, transparent benchmarking of foundation and multimodal models across many scenarios and metrics.
agent-eval★ 23Measure how well coding agents actually use your library