mcpField
I
iterate

iterate

github.com/sharpdeveyeAgent workflows592335 installsUpdated 26w ago
Repository

About iterate

A workflow skill for adding evaluation and correction loops to agent workflows. It covers quality criteria, evaluator selection, regression checks, and ongoing output monitoring.

Key features

  1. 01Define weighted quality criteria and thresholds
  2. 02Choose rule-based, model, or human evaluation
  3. 03Regenerate outputs using evaluator feedback
  4. 04Compare changes against a golden test set
  5. 05Monitor quality scores over time

Use cases

  1. 01Improve generated output through feedback-based retries
  2. 02Check prompt or tool changes for regressions
  3. 03Track production output quality

Install

Copy the command and run it in a terminal.

$npx skills add https://github.com/sharpdeveye/maestro --skill iterate

After installing, type/iteratein Claude Code to confirm it loaded.

Details

From the project README

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:

DimensionWeightThresholdMeasurement
Accuracy0.4≥ 0.8Factual correctness check
Completeness0.3≥ 0.7Required fields present
Format0.2≥ 0.9Schema compliance
Tone0.1≥ 0.6Appropriate 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:

  1. Run golden test set with OLD config → baseline scores
  2. Run golden test set with NEW config → new scores
  3. 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

Comments

Markdown supported