evaluator
Schema Definition
type: object
required:
- type
- name
- inputs
properties:
type:
type: string
enum: [evaluator]
description: Block type identifier
name:
type: string
description: Display name for this evaluator block
inputs:
type: object
required:
- content
- metrics
- model
- apiKey
properties:
content:
type: string
description: Content to evaluate (can reference other blocks)
metrics:
type: array
description: Evaluation criteria and scoring ranges
items:
type: object
properties:
name:
type: string
description: Metric identifier
description:
type: string
description: Detailed explanation of what the metric measures
range:
type: object
properties:
min:
type: number
description: Minimum score value
max:
type: number
description: Maximum score value
required: [min, max]
description: Scoring range with numeric bounds
model:
type: string
description: AI model identifier (e.g., gpt-4o, claude-3-5-sonnet-20241022)
apiKey:
type: string
description: API key for the model provider (use {{ENV_VAR}} format)
temperature:
type: number
minimum: 0
maximum: 2
description: Model temperature for evaluation
default: 0.3
azureEndpoint:
type: string
description: Azure OpenAI endpoint URL (required for Azure models)
azureApiVersion:
type: string
description: Azure API version (required for Azure models)
connections:
type: object
properties:
success:
type: string
description: Target block ID for successful evaluation
error:
type: string
description: Target block ID for error handlingConnection Configuration
Connections define where the workflow goes based on evaluation results:
Examples
Content Quality Evaluation
Customer Response Evaluation
A/B Testing Evaluation
Multi-Dimensional Content Scoring
Output References
After an evaluator block executes, you can reference its outputs:
Best Practices
Define clear, specific evaluation criteria
Use appropriate scoring ranges for your use case
Choose models with strong reasoning capabilities
Use lower temperature for consistent scoring
Include detailed metric descriptions
Test with diverse content types
Consider multiple evaluators for complex assessments
Was this helpful?
