Agent skill

LLM Evaluation

by davila7 in davila7/claude-code-templates

Master comprehensive evaluation strategies for LLM applications, from automated metrics to human evaluation and A/B testing.

MITAuto-check passedAI & LLM Engineering

Install LLM Evaluation

skills CLI
$ npx skills add davila7/claude-code-templates --skill llm-evaluation -a claude-code

Project install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.

GitHub CLI
$ gh skill install davila7/claude-code-templates llm-evaluation --agent claude-code

Project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).

Manual copy
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/davila7/claude-code-templates.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/cli-tool/components/skills/ai-research/llm-evaluation .claude/skills/llm-evaluation && rm -rf skills-src

Use ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.

Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/

Facts

Skill name
llm-evaluation
GitHub stars
32k
Used in
12 other repos
Token cost
~3.5k tokens
SKILL.md length
418 words
Files
1
Skills in repo
478
Repo updated
First seen
Licence
MIT

At a glance

Master comprehensive evaluation strategies for LLM applications, from automated metrics to human evaluation and A/B testing.

  • Works in 3 steps: Automated Metrics → Human Evaluation → LLM-as-Judge
  • Tasks that involve LLM evaluation
  • SKILL.md covers Do not use this skill when, Instructions, Use this skill when and Core Evaluation Types, plus 10 more sections
  • Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md

What it does

LLM Evaluation is an agent skill from davila7/claude-code-templates. Master comprehensive evaluation strategies for LLM applications, from automated metrics to human evaluation and A/B testing.

Its SKILL.md is about 3.5k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. It is a single SKILL.md file with no bundled scripts.

It sits in AI & LLM Engineering, covering LLM evaluation and A/B testing. The repository describes itself as: CLI tool for configuring and monitoring Claude Code. The licence is MIT.

When your agent uses it

  • Tasks that involve LLM evaluation
  • Tasks that involve A/B testing

Example prompts

  • “/llm-evaluation”

Requirements

  • Python 3

Workflow steps

3 steps, taken from the step headings in SKILL.md.

  1. Automated Metrics
  2. Human Evaluation
  3. LLM-as-Judge

What it can do on your machine

Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit 46b4d8b. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.

  • Tool permissions

    Pre-approves nothing: there is no allowed-tools line, so your agent's usual permission prompts apply.

    From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.

  • Runs code

    No scripts in the folder and no shell commands in SKILL.md (its code samples are python).

    From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.

  • Network

    No URLs in SKILL.md.

    From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.

  • Credentials

    Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.

    From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.

Context cost

LLM Evaluation loads about 3.5k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 35 tokens; SKILL.md has 418 words of instructions outside code blocks.

Always · name and description, kept in context so the agent knows when to use it
~35
When it runs · the whole SKILL.md, loaded when a task matches
~3.5k

Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.

Safety

Auto-check passed

The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.

Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); files beside SKILL.md are not scanned.

SKILL.md

The full file from davila7/claude-code-templates at commit 46b4d8b, republished under its MIT licence (© davila7). 418 words, ~3,521 tokens.

Download SKILL.mdSave it as .claude/skills/llm-evaluation/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).
name
llm-evaluation
description
Master comprehensive evaluation strategies for LLM applications, from automated metrics to human evaluation and A/B testing.
risk
unknown
source
community
date_added
2026-02-27

LLM Evaluation

Master comprehensive evaluation strategies for LLM applications, from automated metrics to human evaluation and A/B testing.

Do not use this skill when

  • The task is unrelated to llm evaluation
  • You need a different domain or tool outside this scope

Instructions

  • Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs.
  • Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes.
  • Provide actionable steps and verification.
  • If detailed examples are required, open resources/implementation-playbook.md.

Use this skill when

  • Measuring LLM application performance systematically
  • Comparing different models or prompts
  • Detecting performance regressions before deployment
  • Validating improvements from prompt changes
  • Building confidence in production systems
  • Establishing baselines and tracking progress over time
  • Debugging unexpected model behavior

Core Evaluation Types

1. Automated Metrics

Fast, repeatable, scalable evaluation using computed scores.

Text Generation:

  • BLEU: N-gram overlap (translation)
  • ROUGE: Recall-oriented (summarization)
  • METEOR: Semantic similarity
  • BERTScore: Embedding-based similarity
  • Perplexity: Language model confidence

Classification:

  • Accuracy: Percentage correct
  • Precision/Recall/F1: Class-specific performance
  • Confusion Matrix: Error patterns
  • AUC-ROC: Ranking quality

Retrieval (RAG):

  • MRR: Mean Reciprocal Rank
  • NDCG: Normalized Discounted Cumulative Gain
  • Precision@K: Relevant in top K
  • Recall@K: Coverage in top K
2. Human Evaluation

Manual assessment for quality aspects difficult to automate.

Dimensions:

  • Accuracy: Factual correctness
  • Coherence: Logical flow
  • Relevance: Answers the question
  • Fluency: Natural language quality
  • Safety: No harmful content
  • Helpfulness: Useful to the user
3. LLM-as-Judge

Use stronger LLMs to evaluate weaker model outputs.

Approaches:

  • Pointwise: Score individual responses
  • Pairwise: Compare two responses
  • Reference-based: Compare to gold standard
  • Reference-free: Judge without ground truth

Quick Start

python
from llm_eval import EvaluationSuite, Metric

# Define evaluation suite
suite = EvaluationSuite([
    Metric.accuracy(),
    Metric.bleu(),
    Metric.bertscore(),
    Metric.custom(name="groundedness", fn=check_groundedness)
])

# Prepare test cases
test_cases = [
    {
        "input": "What is the capital of France?",
        "expected": "Paris",
        "context": "France is a country in Europe. Paris is its capital."
    },
    # ... more test cases
]

# Run evaluation
results = suite.evaluate(
    model=your_model,
    test_cases=test_cases
)

print(f"Overall Accuracy: {results.metrics['accuracy']}")
print(f"BLEU Score: {results.metrics['bleu']}")

Automated Metrics Implementation

BLEU Score
python
from nltk.translate.bleu_score import sentence_bleu, SmoothingFunction

def calculate_bleu(reference, hypothesis):
    """Calculate BLEU score between reference and hypothesis."""
    smoothie = SmoothingFunction().method4

    return sentence_bleu(
        [reference.split()],
        hypothesis.split(),
        smoothing_function=smoothie
    )

# Usage
bleu = calculate_bleu(
    reference="The cat sat on the mat",
    hypothesis="A cat is sitting on the mat"
)
ROUGE Score
python
from rouge_score import rouge_scorer

def calculate_rouge(reference, hypothesis):
    """Calculate ROUGE scores."""
    scorer = rouge_scorer.RougeScorer(['rouge1', 'rouge2', 'rougeL'], use_stemmer=True)
    scores = scorer.score(reference, hypothesis)

    return {
        'rouge1': scores['rouge1'].fmeasure,
        'rouge2': scores['rouge2'].fmeasure,
        'rougeL': scores['rougeL'].fmeasure
    }
BERTScore
python
from bert_score import score

def calculate_bertscore(references, hypotheses):
    """Calculate BERTScore using pre-trained BERT."""
    P, R, F1 = score(
        hypotheses,
        references,
        lang='en',
        model_type='microsoft/deberta-xlarge-mnli'
    )

    return {
        'precision': P.mean().item(),
        'recall': R.mean().item(),
        'f1': F1.mean().item()
    }
Custom Metrics
python
def calculate_groundedness(response, context):
    """Check if response is grounded in provided context."""
    # Use NLI model to check entailment
    from transformers import pipeline

    nli = pipeline("text-classification", model="microsoft/deberta-large-mnli")

    result = nli(f"{context} [SEP] {response}")[0]

    # Return confidence that response is entailed by context
    return result['score'] if result['label'] == 'ENTAILMENT' else 0.0

def calculate_toxicity(text):
    """Measure toxicity in generated text."""
    from detoxify import Detoxify

    results = Detoxify('original').predict(text)
    return max(results.values())  # Return highest toxicity score

def calculate_factuality(claim, knowledge_base):
    """Verify factual claims against knowledge base."""
    # Implementation depends on your knowledge base
    # Could use retrieval + NLI, or fact-checking API
    pass
Show full SKILL.md (168 more words)Show less

LLM-as-Judge Patterns

Single Output Evaluation
python
def llm_judge_quality(response, question):
    """Use GPT-5 to judge response quality."""
    prompt = f"""Rate the following response on a scale of 1-10 for:
1. Accuracy (factually correct)
2. Helpfulness (answers the question)
3. Clarity (well-written and understandable)

Question: {question}
Response: {response}

Provide ratings in JSON format:
{{
  "accuracy": <1-10>,
  "helpfulness": <1-10>,
  "clarity": <1-10>,
  "reasoning": "<brief explanation>"
}}
"""

    result = openai.ChatCompletion.create(
        model="gpt-5",
        messages=[{"role": "user", "content": prompt}],
        temperature=0
    )

    return json.loads(result.choices[0].message.content)
Pairwise Comparison
python
def compare_responses(question, response_a, response_b):
    """Compare two responses using LLM judge."""
    prompt = f"""Compare these two responses to the question and determine which is better.

Question: {question}

Response A: {response_a}

Response B: {response_b}

Which response is better and why? Consider accuracy, helpfulness, and clarity.

Answer with JSON:
{{
  "winner": "A" or "B" or "tie",
  "reasoning": "<explanation>",
  "confidence": <1-10>
}}
"""

    result = openai.ChatCompletion.create(
        model="gpt-5",
        messages=[{"role": "user", "content": prompt}],
        temperature=0
    )

    return json.loads(result.choices[0].message.content)

Human Evaluation Frameworks

Annotation Guidelines
python
class AnnotationTask:
    """Structure for human annotation task."""

    def __init__(self, response, question, context=None):
        self.response = response
        self.question = question
        self.context = context

    def get_annotation_form(self):
        return {
            "question": self.question,
            "context": self.context,
            "response": self.response,
            "ratings": {
                "accuracy": {
                    "scale": "1-5",
                    "description": "Is the response factually correct?"
                },
                "relevance": {
                    "scale": "1-5",
                    "description": "Does it answer the question?"
                },
                "coherence": {
                    "scale": "1-5",
                    "description": "Is it logically consistent?"
                }
            },
            "issues": {
                "factual_error": False,
                "hallucination": False,
                "off_topic": False,
                "unsafe_content": False
            },
            "feedback": ""
        }
Inter-Rater Agreement
python
from sklearn.metrics import cohen_kappa_score

def calculate_agreement(rater1_scores, rater2_scores):
    """Calculate inter-rater agreement."""
    kappa = cohen_kappa_score(rater1_scores, rater2_scores)

    interpretation = {
        kappa < 0: "Poor",
        kappa < 0.2: "Slight",
        kappa < 0.4: "Fair",
        kappa < 0.6: "Moderate",
        kappa < 0.8: "Substantial",
        kappa <= 1.0: "Almost Perfect"
    }

    return {
        "kappa": kappa,
        "interpretation": interpretation[True]
    }

A/B Testing

Statistical Testing Framework
python
from scipy import stats
import numpy as np

class ABTest:
    def __init__(self, variant_a_name="A", variant_b_name="B"):
        self.variant_a = {"name": variant_a_name, "scores": []}
        self.variant_b = {"name": variant_b_name, "scores": []}

    def add_result(self, variant, score):
        """Add evaluation result for a variant."""
        if variant == "A":
            self.variant_a["scores"].append(score)
        else:
            self.variant_b["scores"].append(score)

    def analyze(self, alpha=0.05):
        """Perform statistical analysis."""
        a_scores = self.variant_a["scores"]
        b_scores = self.variant_b["scores"]

        # T-test
        t_stat, p_value = stats.ttest_ind(a_scores, b_scores)

        # Effect size (Cohen's d)
        pooled_std = np.sqrt((np.std(a_scores)**2 + np.std(b_scores)**2) / 2)
        cohens_d = (np.mean(b_scores) - np.mean(a_scores)) / pooled_std

        return {
            "variant_a_mean": np.mean(a_scores),
            "variant_b_mean": np.mean(b_scores),
            "difference": np.mean(b_scores) - np.mean(a_scores),
            "relative_improvement": (np.mean(b_scores) - np.mean(a_scores)) / np.mean(a_scores),
            "p_value": p_value,
            "statistically_significant": p_value < alpha,
            "cohens_d": cohens_d,
            "effect_size": self.interpret_cohens_d(cohens_d),
            "winner": "B" if np.mean(b_scores) > np.mean(a_scores) else "A"
        }

    @staticmethod
    def interpret_cohens_d(d):
        """Interpret Cohen's d effect size."""
        abs_d = abs(d)
        if abs_d < 0.2:
            return "negligible"
        elif abs_d < 0.5:
            return "small"
        elif abs_d < 0.8:
            return "medium"
        else:
            return "large"

Regression Testing

Regression Detection
python
class RegressionDetector:
    def __init__(self, baseline_results, threshold=0.05):
        self.baseline = baseline_results
        self.threshold = threshold

    def check_for_regression(self, new_results):
        """Detect if new results show regression."""
        regressions = []

        for metric in self.baseline.keys():
            baseline_score = self.baseline[metric]
            new_score = new_results.get(metric)

            if new_score is None:
                continue

            # Calculate relative change
            relative_change = (new_score - baseline_score) / baseline_score

            # Flag if significant decrease
            if relative_change < -self.threshold:
                regressions.append({
                    "metric": metric,
                    "baseline": baseline_score,
                    "current": new_score,
                    "change": relative_change
                })

        return {
            "has_regression": len(regressions) > 0,
            "regressions": regressions
        }

Benchmarking

Running Benchmarks
python
class BenchmarkRunner:
    def __init__(self, benchmark_dataset):
        self.dataset = benchmark_dataset

    def run_benchmark(self, model, metrics):
        """Run model on benchmark and calculate metrics."""
        results = {metric.name: [] for metric in metrics}

        for example in self.dataset:
            # Generate prediction
            prediction = model.predict(example["input"])

            # Calculate each metric
            for metric in metrics:
                score = metric.calculate(
                    prediction=prediction,
                    reference=example["reference"],
                    context=example.get("context")
                )
                results[metric.name].append(score)

        # Aggregate results
        return {
            metric: {
                "mean": np.mean(scores),
                "std": np.std(scores),
                "min": min(scores),
                "max": max(scores)
            }
            for metric, scores in results.items()
        }

Resources

  • references/metrics.md: Comprehensive metric guide
  • references/human-evaluation.md: Annotation best practices
  • references/benchmarking.md: Standard benchmarks
  • references/a-b-testing.md: Statistical testing guide
  • references/regression-testing.md: CI/CD integration
  • assets/evaluation-framework.py: Complete evaluation harness
  • assets/benchmark-dataset.jsonl: Example datasets
  • scripts/evaluate-model.py: Automated evaluation runner

Best Practices

  1. Multiple Metrics: Use diverse metrics for comprehensive view
  2. Representative Data: Test on real-world, diverse examples
  3. Baselines: Always compare against baseline performance
  4. Statistical Rigor: Use proper statistical tests for comparisons
  5. Continuous Evaluation: Integrate into CI/CD pipeline
  6. Human Validation: Combine automated metrics with human judgment
  7. Error Analysis: Investigate failures to understand weaknesses
  8. Version Control: Track evaluation results over time

Common Pitfalls

  • Single Metric Obsession: Optimizing for one metric at the expense of others
  • Small Sample Size: Drawing conclusions from too few examples
  • Data Contamination: Testing on training data
  • Ignoring Variance: Not accounting for statistical uncertainty
  • Metric Mismatch: Using metrics not aligned with business goals

© davila7, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file

Files

Just SKILL.md in cli-tool/components/skills/ai-research/llm-evaluation of davila7/claude-code-templates.

Open the folder on GitHubat commit 46b4d8b

Used in 12 other repositories

We found 26 copies of this SKILL.md (exact, near-identical or edited) in other folders, from 12 other GitHub owners. This page covers the copy in davila7/claude-code-templates, which our catalogue first saw on October 7, 2026.

Compare with similar skills

LLM Evaluation next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.

LLM Evaluation compared with similar skills
SkillStarsUsed inTokensAuto-checkLicenceRepo updated
LLM Evaluation this skilldavila7/claude-code-templates32k12 repos~3.5kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Skill Forge BenchmarkAgriciDaniel/skill-forge179—~1.4kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Spec Optimizeleo-kuang-ai/spec-first107—~13kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
LLM Benchmarking with lm-evaluation-harnessOrchestra-Research/AI-Research-SKILLs13k8 repos~3kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Hugging Face Local Model Evalshuggingface/skills11k2 repos~1.6kAutomated safety check: PassApache-2.0
Looperksimback/looper710—~2.7kAutomated safety check: NotesMIT

Similar skills

  • Skill Forge Benchmark

    AgriciDaniel/skill-forge

    Benchmark Claude Code skill performance with variance analysis, tracking pass rate, execution time, and token usage across iterations.

    179 GitHub stars~1.4k tokensUpdated 6 mo ago
    AI & LLM EngineeringAuto-check passed
  • Spec Optimize

    leo-kuang-ai/spec-first

    Run metric-driven iterative optimization loops. An agent skill from leo-kuang-ai/spec-first.

    107 GitHub stars~13k tokensUpdated today
    AI & LLM EngineeringAuto-check passed
  • LLM Benchmarking with lm-evaluation-harness

    Orchestra-Research/AI-Research-SKILLs

    Runs lm-evaluation-harness to benchmark language models on academic suites such as MMLU, GSM8K and HumanEval, compare models and track training checkpoints.

    13k GitHub starsUsed in 8 repos~3k tokens
    AI & LLM EngineeringAuto-check passed
  • Official

    Runs evaluations of Hugging Face Hub models on local hardware with inspect-ai or lighteval, and helps choose between vLLM, Transformers and accelerate backends.

    11k GitHub starsUsed in 2 repos~1.6k tokens
    AI & LLM EngineeringAuto-check passed
  • Looper

    ksimback/looper

    Scaffold a well-designed agent loop with best-practice coaching and a cross-model review council.

    710 GitHub stars~2.7k tokensUpdated 2 mo ago
    AI & LLM EngineeringAuto-check: notes
  • Agent Eval Engineering

    langchain-ai/langchain-skills

    Official

    Builds agent evaluations in stages: inspect the repository and traces, agree a Task Spec with you, then build, audit and run a Harbor task with an independent verifier.

    1.3k GitHub stars~4k tokensUpdated today
    AI & LLM EngineeringAuto-check passed

More from davila7/claude-code-templates

All 478 skills in this repo
  • Perplexity Web Search

    davila7/claude-code-templates

    Runs web-grounded searches through Perplexity's Sonar models over OpenRouter for current events, recent literature and cited facts beyond the model's training cutoff.

    32k GitHub starsUsed in 11 repos~3.5k tokens
    Auto-check: notes
  • Neuropixels Data Analysis

    davila7/claude-code-templates

    Analyzes Neuropixels recordings from SpikeGLX or Open Ephys through preprocessing, drift correction, Kilosort4 spike sorting, quality metrics and curation.

    32k GitHub starsUsed in 9 repos~2.8k tokens
    Auto-check passed
  • Scientific Venue Templates

    davila7/claude-code-templates

    Supplies LaTeX templates and formatting rules for journals, conferences, posters, and grant proposals, then can check a draft against them.

    32k GitHub starsUsed in 9 repos~5.1k tokens
    Auto-check: notes
  • Brand Voice Content Creator

    davila7/claude-code-templates

    Analyzes a brand's existing writing to lock in a consistent voice, then builds SEO blog posts and platform-specific social content around it.

    32k GitHub starsUsed in 3 repos~1.9k tokens
    Auto-check passed
  • CAPA Officer

    davila7/claude-code-templates

    Guides corrective and preventive action (CAPA) work in a quality management system, from initiation and root cause analysis through effectiveness verification.

    32k GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~2k tokens
    Auto-check passed
  • Fda Consultant Specialist

    davila7/claude-code-templates

    Senior FDA consultant and specialist for medical device companies including HIPAA compliance and requirement management.

    32k GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~2.7k tokens
    Auto-check passed

Questions about LLM Evaluation

What does LLM Evaluation do?

Master comprehensive evaluation strategies for LLM applications, from automated metrics to human evaluation and A/B testing. LLM Evaluation is an agent skill from davila7/claude-code-templates. Master comprehensive evaluation strategies for LLM applications, from automated metrics to human evaluation and A/B testing.

When should I use LLM Evaluation?

LLM Evaluation fits situations like: tasks that involve LLM evaluation; tasks that involve A/B testing.

How do I install LLM Evaluation in Claude Code?

Run `npx skills add davila7/claude-code-templates --skill llm-evaluation -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (cli-tool/components/skills/ai-research/llm-evaluation in davila7/claude-code-templates) into .claude/skills/llm-evaluation in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.

How do I install LLM Evaluation in Codex?

Run `npx skills add davila7/claude-code-templates --skill llm-evaluation -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (cli-tool/components/skills/ai-research/llm-evaluation in davila7/claude-code-templates) into .agents/skills/llm-evaluation in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.

Can I use LLM Evaluation in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?

Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add davila7/claude-code-templates --skill llm-evaluation -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/llm-evaluation, .gemini/skills/llm-evaluation, .github/skills/llm-evaluation and .opencode/skills/llm-evaluation in your project.

What does LLM Evaluation need to run?

SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: LLM Evaluation is instructions for the agent only. Our summary lists: Python 3.

Does LLM Evaluation access the network?

SKILL.md contains no URLs. Any network use would come from the scripts or tools the agent runs. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.

Is LLM Evaluation safe to install?

Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. Review the folder before installing.

What licence does LLM Evaluation use?

LLM Evaluation is published under the MIT licence (the repository's licence). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.

How many tokens does LLM Evaluation use?

About 3.5k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 14k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full.

What are the alternatives to LLM Evaluation?

Skills that share tags, products or a category with LLM Evaluation: Skill Forge Benchmark (AgriciDaniel/skill-forge, 179 stars), Spec Optimize (leo-kuang-ai/spec-first, 107 stars), LLM Benchmarking with lm-evaluation-harness (Orchestra-Research/AI-Research-SKILLs, 13k stars) and Hugging Face Local Model Evals (huggingface/skills, 11k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.

Who maintains LLM Evaluation?

davila7 (a GitHub user) maintains it in davila7/claude-code-templates, which has 32,483 GitHub stars. The repository holds 478 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on October 9, 2026.

Source: davila7/claude-code-templates on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.