CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

testland/deepeval-evaluation

Authors and runs DeepEval - pytest-native LLM eval framework with `LLMTestCase` (input + actual_output + expected_output + retrieval_context) and ~11 built-in metrics (G-Eval, Answer-Relevancy, Faithfulness, Contextual-Recall / Precision / Relevancy, Hallucination, Bias, Toxicity, Summarization, JSON-Correctness); runs via `deepeval test run {file.py}` with `assert_test()` per test or `evaluate()` for batch; integrates Confident-AI dashboard. Use when the user prefers pytest workflow, works with RAG and needs faithfulness/contextual metrics out-of-the-box, or wants a managed dashboard.

73

Quality

92%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Overview
Quality
Evals
Security
Files

SKILL.md

name:
deepeval-evaluation
description:
Authors and runs DeepEval - pytest-native LLM eval framework with `LLMTestCase` (input + actual_output + expected_output + retrieval_context) and ~11 built-in metrics (G-Eval, Answer-Relevancy, Faithfulness, Contextual-Recall / Precision / Relevancy, Hallucination, Bias, Toxicity, Summarization, JSON-Correctness); runs via `deepeval test run {file.py}` with `assert_test()` per test or `evaluate()` for batch; integrates Confident-AI dashboard. Use when the user prefers pytest workflow, works with RAG and needs faithfulness/contextual metrics out-of-the-box, or wants a managed dashboard.

deepeval-evaluation

Overview

Per de-start, DeepEval is "an open-source LLM eval package" enabling "evaluation of LLM applications locally through test cases and metrics." The model: each test constructs an LLMTestCase, applies one or more Metric instances, and either asserts (assert_test) or batch-evaluates (evaluate). Pytest discovery + reporting works unchanged.

When to use

  • The repo already uses pytest; LLM tests should live alongside unit tests.
  • The user works with RAG and needs Faithfulness / Contextual-* metrics without writing them from scratch.
  • The team wants a managed dashboard (Confident-AI) for regression tracking + prompt-vs-prompt comparison.
  • Programmatic test-case authoring (data-driven from a CSV/JSONL) is needed and pytest fixtures fit better than YAML config.

Step 1 - Install

Per de-gh and de-start:

pip install -U deepeval

Optional Confident-AI login (for dashboard):

deepeval login

Per de-start: after login "Confident AI will generate testing reports and automate regression testing whenever you run a test run."

Step 2 - First test

Per de-gh (verbatim quickstart):

import pytest
from deepeval import assert_test
from deepeval.metrics import GEval
from deepeval.test_case import LLMTestCase, SingleTurnParams

def test_case():
    correctness_metric = GEval(
        name="Correctness",
        criteria="Determine if the 'actual output' is correct based on the 'expected output'.",
        evaluation_params=[SingleTurnParams.ACTUAL_OUTPUT, SingleTurnParams.EXPECTED_OUTPUT],
        threshold=0.5
    )
    test_case = LLMTestCase(
        input="What if these shoes don't fit?",
        actual_output="You have 30 days to get a full refund at no extra cost.",
        expected_output="We offer a 30-day full refund at no extra costs.",
        retrieval_context=["All customers are eligible for a 30 day full refund at no extra costs."]
    )
    assert_test(test_case, [correctness_metric])

Run it:

deepeval test run test_chatbot.py

(Per de-gh.)

Step 3 - LLMTestCase fields

Per de-start, LLMTestCase fields:

FieldRequiredNotes
inputyesThe user prompt / query
actual_outputyesWhat the LLM produced
expected_outputoptionalReference answer (used by metrics that compare)
retrieval_contextoptionalList of retrieved chunks for RAG metrics
contextoptionalGround-truth context for hallucination metric

Step 4 - Metric catalog

Per de-gh the available metrics include:

MetricUse
GEvalCustom rubric-based scoring (LLM-as-judge with chain-of-thought)
AnswerRelevancyMetricDoes actual_output answer input?
FaithfulnessMetricDoes actual_output only state facts in retrieval_context?
ContextualRecallMetricDoes retrieval_context contain enough info to produce expected_output?
ContextualPrecisionMetricAre relevant chunks ranked higher in retrieval_context?
ContextualRelevancyMetricAre chunks in retrieval_context relevant to input?
HallucinationMetricDoes actual_output contradict context?
BiasMetricBias detection in actual_output
ToxicityMetricToxic-content detection
SummarizationMetricSummary quality vs source
JsonCorrectnessMetricValid + schema-conformant JSON output

Each metric takes a threshold parameter; the test passes if score ≥ threshold.

Step 5 - Custom GEval pattern

GEval is the universal escape hatch when no built-in metric fits:

from deepeval.metrics import GEval
from deepeval.test_case import SingleTurnParams

professionalism = GEval(
    name="Professionalism",
    criteria="Determine if the response uses professional language without slang or contractions.",
    evaluation_params=[SingleTurnParams.ACTUAL_OUTPUT],
    threshold=0.7,
)

The criteria string is the rubric; the judge model evaluates and returns a 0 - 1 score with reasoning attached.

Step 6 - Batch evaluation (no pytest)

For dataset-driven runs without pytest:

from deepeval import evaluate

evaluate(test_cases=[case1, case2, case3], metrics=[g_eval, faithfulness])

Returns scores per metric per case; useful for regression sweeps across a CSV/JSONL of historical inputs.

Step 7 - CI integration

deepeval test run tests/llm/ --run-async --workers 4
# pytest exit code propagates: nonzero if any assert_test fails

Combine with Confident-AI for a dashboard view of run history; Confident-AI is the company behind DeepEval (per de-gh).

Anti-patterns

Anti-patternWhy it failsFix
threshold=0.0 on every metricTests never fail; eval theaterPick real thresholds (0.5 - 0.8 typical)
Hallucination metric without contextMetric has nothing to compare againstAlways pass context (Step 3)
Faithfulness metric without retrieval_contextSame problemPass retrieval chunks (Step 3)
Custom GEval criteria too vagueJudge produces inconsistent scoresConcrete criteria with examples (Step 5)
Skip --workers in CISequential runs slow + costly--workers 4 parallelization (Step 7)

Limitations

  • LLM-as-judge metrics depend on judge-model quality + cost; pin judge model version in CI.
  • Confident-AI is the managed dashboard; without it, regression tracking is manual (parse pytest output).
  • Test cases live in Python files - not as discoverable as YAML configs for non-Python teammates (vs Promptfoo).
  • Faithfulness / Contextual-* metrics need RAG-shaped data; for pure prompt evals, promptfoo-evaluation is lower-friction.

References

  • de-gh - repository, install, quickstart, metric list
  • de-start - getting-started overview
  • promptfoo-evaluation, ragas-evaluation - sister tools (Promptfoo for YAML-config; Ragas for deeper RAG metric variety)

SKILL.md

tile.json