mcpField
P
prompt-regression-tester

prompt-regression-tester

github.com/patricio0312revTesting & quality63252 installsUpdated 41w ago
Repository

About prompt-regression-tester

prompt-regression-tester is a skill for evaluating prompt revisions against defined test cases. It helps prompt authors detect regressions through comparison, stability metrics, breakage analysis, and reports.

Key features

  1. 01Compare old and new prompt outputs
  2. 02Measure output and format stability
  3. 03Check constraints and behavior changes
  4. 04Analyze failures and suggest fixes
  5. 05Generate regression reports

Use cases

  1. 01Review a prompt change before deployment
  2. 02Track prompt behavior across repeated runs
  3. 03Find missing required content in outputs

Install

Copy the command and run it in a terminal.

$npx skills add https://github.com/patricio0312rev/skills --skill prompt-regression-tester

After installing, type/prompt-regression-testerin Claude Code to confirm it loaded.

Details

From the project README

Prompt Regression Tester

Systematically test prompt changes to prevent regressions.

Test Case Format

{
  "test_cases": [
    {
      "id": "test_001",
      "input": "Summarize this article",
      "context": "Article text here...",
      "expected_behavior": "Concise 2-3 sentence summary",
      "baseline_output": "Output from v1.0 prompt",
      "must_include": ["main point", "conclusion"],
      "must_not_include": ["opinion", "speculation"]
    }
  ]
}

Comparison Framework

def compare_prompts(old_prompt, new_prompt, test_cases):
    results = {
        "test_cases": [],
        "summary": {
            "total": len(test_cases),
            "improvements": 0,
            "regressions": 0,
            "unchanged": 0,
        },
        "breakages": []
    }

    for test in test_cases:
        old_output = llm(old_prompt.format(**test))
        new_output = llm(new_prompt.format(**test))

        comparison = {
            "test_id": test["id"],
            "old_output": old_output,
            "new_output": new_output,
            "diff": compute_diff(old_output, new_output),
            "scores": {
                "old": score_output(old_output, test),
                "new": score_output(new_output, test),
            },
            "verdict": classify_change(old_output, new_output, test)
        }

        results["test_cases"].append(comparison)
        results["summary"][comparison["verdict"]] += 1

        if comparison["verdict"] == "regressions":
            results["breakages"].append(analyze_breakage(comparison, test))

    return results

Stability Metrics

def calculate_stability_metrics(results):
    return {
        "output_stability": measure_output_consistency(results),
        "format_stability": check_format_preservation(results),
        "constraint_adherence": check_constraints(results),
        "behavioral_consistency": measure_behavior_delta(results),
    }

def measure_output_consistency(results):
    """How similar are outputs between versions?"""
    similarities = []
    for result in results["test_cases"]:
        sim = semantic_similarity(
            result["old_output"],
            result["new_output"]
        )
        similarities.append(sim)
    return sum(similarities) / len(similarities)

Breakage Analysis

def analyze_breakage(comparison, test_case):
    """Identify why the new prompt failed"""
    reasons = []

    new_out = comparison["new_output"]

    # Missing required content
    for keyword in test_case.get("must_include", []):
        if keyword.lower() not in new_out.lower():
            reasons.append(f"Missing required content: '{keyword}'")

    # Contains forbidden content
    for keyword in test_case.get("must_not_include", []):
        if keyword.lower() in new_out.lower():
            reasons.append(f"Contains forbidden content: '{keyword}'")

    # Format violations
    if not check_format(new_out, test_case.get("expected_format")):
        reasons.append("Output format violation")

    # Length issues
    expected_length = test_case.get("expected_length")
    if expected_length:
        actual_length = len(new_out.split())
        if abs(actual_length - expected_length) > expected_length * 0.3:
            reasons.append(f"Length deviation: expected ~{expected_length}, got {actual_length}")

    return {
        "test_id": test_case["id"],
        "reasons": reasons,
        "old_output": comparison["old_output"][:100],
        "new_output": comparison["new_output"][:100],
    }

Fix Suggestions

def suggest_fixes(breakages):
    """Generate fix suggestions based on breakage patterns"""
    suggestions = []

    # Group breakages by reason
    reason_groups = {}
    for breakage in breakages:
        for reason in breakage["reasons"]:
            if reason not in reason_groups:
                reason_groups[reason] = []
            reason_groups[reason].append(breakage["test_id"])

    # Generate suggestions
    for reason, test_ids in reason_groups.items():
        if "Missing required content" in reason:
            suggestions.append({
                "issue": reason,
                "affected_tests": test_ids,
                "suggestion": "Add explicit instruction in prompt to include this content",
                "example": f"Make sure to mention {reason.split(':')[1]} in your response."
            })
        elif "format violation" in reason:
            suggestions.append({
                "issue": reason,
                "affected_tests": test_ids,
                "suggestion": "Add stricter format constraints to prompt",
                "example": "Output must follow this exact format: ..."
            })

    return suggestions

Report Generation

# Prompt Regression Report

## Summary

- **Total tests:** 50
- **Improvements:** 5 (10%)
- **Regressions:** 3 (6%)
- **Unchanged:** 42 (84%)

## Stability Metrics

- **Output stability:** 0.87
- **Format stability:** 0.95
- **Constraint adherence:** 0.94

## Regressions (3)

### test_005: Missing required content

**Old output:** "The main benefit is cost savings..."
**New output:** "This approach provides flexibility..."
**Issue:** Missing required keyword 'cost'
**Fix:** Add explicit instruction: "Mention cost implications in your response"

## Recommended Actions

1. Revert changes that caused regressions (tests: 005, 012, 023)
2. Add format constraints for JSON output
3. Run full test suite before deployment

Best Practices

  • Test with diverse inputs
  • Compare across multiple runs (LLMs are stochastic)
  • Track metrics over time
  • Automate in CI/CD
  • Review all regressions before deploy
  • Maintain test case library

Output Checklist

  • Test cases defined (30+)
  • Comparison runner
  • Stability metrics
  • Breakage analyzer
  • Fix suggestions
  • Diff visualizer
  • Automated report
  • CI integration

Comments

Markdown supported