Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

ai-improving-accuracy(AI 提高准确性)

ai-improving-accuracy 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

ai-improving-accuracy 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为需要联网;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描有提醒项,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 57,864。

总安装 423周安装 18GitHub Stars 3下载 148核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
unknown

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:ai-improving-accuracy(AI 提高准确性)
来源仓库:https://github.com/lebsral/dspy-programming-not-prompting-lms-skills
仓库路径:skills/ai-improving-accuracy
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/lebsral/dspy-programming-not-prompting-lms-skills --skill ai-improving-accuracy
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/lebsral/dspy-programming-not-prompting-lms-skills --skill ai-improving-accuracy

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

通过定义度量指标、运行评估与迭代优化三步闭环提升 AI 系统准确率。适用于问答、抽取、分类等任务的精度调优,支持 DSPy 模块集成。采用自动化优化器减少人工干预,加速模型性能收敛过程。

安装命令:npx skills add https://github.com/lebsral/dspy-programming-not-prompting-lms-skills --skill ai-improving-accuracy 初始阶段需明确定义“正确”答案形式,作为后续评分基准。

来源仓库内路径:skills/ai-improving-accuracy

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 npx skills add https://github.com/lebsral/dspy-programming-not-prompting-lms-ski…;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要需要联网,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

ai-improving-accuracy 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/lebsral/dspy-programming-not-prompting-lms-skills --skil…。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

ai-improving-accuracy 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

ai-improving-accuracy 需要什么权限?

权限级别是需要联网。该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

ai-improving-accuracy 是免费的吗?

公开资料没有标注明确许可证,收费和商用限制都无法确认。正式使用前请到来源仓库核对授权说明。

ai-improving-accuracy 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 423 次,近一周安装 18 次,下载 148 次,GitHub 3 星。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

ai-improving-accuracy 安全吗?

第三方扫描有提醒项,说明存在需要人工确认的行为。安装前请打开源码看清它读了什么、联网到哪里。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。

先想清楚的地方

  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 第三方扫描存在提醒项或未通过项,需要人工逐条确认。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 Codex,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。

不太适合

  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
ai-improving-accuracy

AI 提高准确性 · 本页

4233需要联网未明确有提醒

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

Measure and Improve Your AI

Guide the user through measuring how well their AI works, then systematically improving it. This is a loop: define "good" -> measure -> improve -> verify.

The Workflow

  1. Define what "good" means — write a metric
  2. Measure current quality — run an evaluation
  3. Improve — choose an optimizer, run it
  4. Verify — re-evaluate to confirm improvement
  5. Iterate or ship

Step 1: Define what "good" means (write a metric)

A metric takes an expected answer and the AI's answer, and returns a score.

Exact match (simplest)

def metric(example, prediction, trace=None):
    return prediction.answer == example.answer

Normalized match (handles capitalization/whitespace)

def metric(example, prediction, trace=None):
    return prediction.answer.strip().lower() == example.answer.strip().lower()

Partial credit (for multi-field outputs)

def metric(example, prediction, trace=None):
    fields = ["name", "email", "phone"]
    correct = sum(
        1 for f in fields
        if getattr(prediction, f, "").lower() == getattr(example, f, "").lower()
    )
    return correct / len(fields)

F1 score (for text overlap)

def metric(example, prediction, trace=None):
    gold_tokens = set(example.answer.lower().split())
    pred_tokens = set(prediction.answer.lower().split())
    if not gold_tokens or not pred_tokens:
        return float(gold_tokens == pred_tokens)
    precision = len(gold_tokens & pred_tokens) / len(pred_tokens)
    recall = len(gold_tokens & pred_tokens) / len(gold_tokens)
    if precision + recall == 0:
        return 0.0
    return 2 * (precision * recall) / (precision + recall)

AI-as-judge (for open-ended tasks)

When exact match is too strict (summaries, creative tasks, open-ended Q&A):

class AssessQuality(dspy.Signature):
    """Assess if the predicted answer is correct and complete."""
    question: str = dspy.InputField()
    gold_answer: str = dspy.InputField()
    predicted_answer: str = dspy.InputField()
    is_correct: bool = dspy.OutputField()

def metric(example, prediction, trace=None):
    judge = dspy.Predict(AssessQuality)
    result = judge(
        question=example.question,
        gold_answer=example.answer,
        predicted_answer=prediction.answer,
    )
    return result.is_correct

Composite metric (multiple criteria)

def metric(example, prediction, trace=None):
    correct = float(prediction.answer.lower() == example.answer.lower())
    concise = float(len(prediction.answer.split()) < 50)
    has_reasoning = float(len(getattr(prediction, 'reasoning', '')) > 20)
    return 0.7 * correct + 0.2 * concise + 0.1 * has_reasoning

Training-aware metric

The trace parameter is not None during optimization. Use it for stricter requirements during training:

def metric(example, prediction, trace=None):
    correct = prediction.answer == example.answer
    if trace is not None:
        # During optimization, also require good reasoning
        has_reasoning = len(prediction.reasoning) > 50
        return correct and has_reasoning
    return correct

Step 2: Measure current quality (run evaluation)

Prepare test data

If you don't have enough examples, use /ai-generating-data to generate synthetic training data.

import dspy

# Manual creation
devset = [
    dspy.Example(question="What is DSPy?", answer="A framework for LM programs").with_inputs("question"),
    # 20-100+ examples for reliable evaluation
]

# From CSV/JSON
import json
with open("test_data.json") as f:
    data = json.load(f)
devset = [dspy.Example(**x).with_inputs("question") for x in data]

# From HuggingFace
from datasets import load_dataset
dataset = load_dataset("squad", split="validation[:100]")
devset = [
    dspy.Example(question=x["question"], answer=x["answers"]["text"][0]).with_inputs("question")
    for x in dataset
]

Run evaluation

from dspy.evaluate import Evaluate

evaluator = Evaluate(
    devset=devset,
    metric=metric,
    num_threads=4,
    display_progress=True,
    display_table=5,   # show 5 example results
)

baseline_score = evaluator(my_program)
print(f"Baseline: {baseline_score}")

Step 3: Improve (choose an optimizer)

Quick guide: which optimizer?

Training examplesRecommended optimizerExpected improvementTypical cost
<20GEPA (instruction tuning)5-15%~$0.50
20-50BootstrapFewShot5-20%~$0.50-2
50-200BootstrapFewShot, then MIPROv215-35%~$2-10
200-500MIPROv2 (auto="medium")20-40%~$5-15
50+VizPy ContraPrompt / PromptGrad5-18%~$0 (free tier)
500+MIPROv2 (auto="heavy") or BootstrapFinetune25-50%~$15-50+
Start here
|
+- Just getting started (<50 examples)? -> BootstrapFewShot
|   Quick, cheap, usually gives a solid boost.
|
+- Want better prompts (50+ examples)? -> MIPROv2
|   Optimizes both instructions and examples.
|   Best general-purpose prompt optimizer.
|
+- Want to tune instructions only (<50 examples)? -> GEPA
|   Good when you have few examples.
|
+- Need maximum quality (500+ examples)? -> BootstrapFinetune
|   Fine-tunes the model weights.
|   Best for production with smaller/cheaper models.
|
+- Want to combine approaches? -> BetterTogether
    Jointly optimizes prompts and weights.

Stacking tip: Run BootstrapFewShot first, then MIPROv2 on the result. This often beats either alone — bootstrap finds good examples, then MIPRO refines the instructions.

Optimized prompts are model-specific. If you change models, re-run your optimizer. See /ai-switching-models.

BootstrapFewShot (start here)

Fast, cheap. Finds good examples by running your program and keeping successful traces.

optimizer = dspy.BootstrapFewShot(
    metric=metric,
    max_bootstrapped_demos=4,
    max_labeled_demos=4,
)
optimized = optimizer.compile(my_program, trainset=trainset)

Cost: Minimal (one pass through trainset). Expected improvement: 5-20%.

MIPROv2 (recommended for most cases)

Optimizes both instructions and examples. Best general-purpose optimizer.

optimizer = dspy.MIPROv2(
    metric=metric,
    auto="medium",    # "light", "medium", "heavy"
)
optimized = optimizer.compile(my_program, trainset=trainset)
  • "light": Quick, ~$1-2
  • "medium": Balanced, ~$5-10
  • "heavy": Thorough, ~$15-30

Expected improvement: 15-35%.

GEPA (instruction tuning)

Good with few examples or when you want to focus on instruction quality:

optimizer = dspy.GEPA()
optimized = optimizer.compile(my_program, trainset=trainset, metric=metric)

VizPy (third-party alternative)

VizPy is a commercial prompt optimizer that offers ContraPromptOptimizer (classification) and PromptGradOptimizer (generation). Like GEPA, it optimizes instructions only — not few-shot demos or Pydantic field descriptions. Free tier includes 10 optimization runs/month.

For setup, usage, and a comparison with GEPA/MIPROv2, see /dspy-vizpy.

BootstrapFinetune (maximum quality)

Fine-tunes model weights for the biggest accuracy gains. Requires 500+ examples and a fine-tunable model:

optimizer = dspy.BootstrapFinetune(metric=metric, num_threads=24)
optimized = optimizer.compile(my_program, trainset=trainset)

For the full fine-tuning workflow (decision framework, prerequisites, model distillation, BetterTogether), see /ai-fine-tuning.

When optimization plateaus

If your score stops improving, check these common causes:

SymptomLikely causeFix
Score stuck at 60-70% despite optimizationTask too complex for single step/ai-decomposing-tasks — break into subtasks
Optimizer overfits (train score high, dev score flat)Too little training data/ai-generating-data — generate more examples
Score varies wildly between runsNon-deterministic metric or small devsetIncrease devset to 100+, set temperature=0
Diminishing returns from more demosPrompt is maxed out; model is the limit/ai-switching-models — try a more capable model
Score high but real users complainMetric doesn't match real qualityRewrite metric based on actual failure patterns

Step 4: Verify improvement

optimized_score = evaluator(optimized)
print(f"Baseline: {baseline_score:.1f}%")
print(f"Optimized: {optimized_score:.1f}%")
print(f"Improvement: {optimized_score - baseline_score:.1f}%")

Step 5: Save and ship

optimized.save("optimized_program.json")

# Load later
my_program = MyProgram()
my_program.load("optimized_program.json")

Key patterns

  • Start simple: exact match metric + BootstrapFewShot, then upgrade if needed
  • Validate your metric: manually check 10-20 examples to make sure the metric scores correctly
  • More data helps: optimizers work better with more training examples
  • Never evaluate on trainset: always use a held-out devset
  • Use display_table: looking at actual predictions reveals metric bugs
  • Iterate: run optimization, check results, improve metric, re-optimize

Additional resources

  • For optimizer comparison table and metric patterns, see reference.md
  • Once quality is good, use /ai-cutting-costs to reduce your AI bill
  • Use /ai-monitoring to track quality in production after deployment
  • Use /ai-tracking-experiments to log, compare, and manage multiple optimization runs
  • Accuracy plateaued despite optimization? Try /ai-decomposing-tasks to restructure your task
  • If things are broken, use /ai-fixing-errors to diagnose
  • Install /ai-do if you do not have it — it routes any AI problem to the right skill and is the fastest way to work: npx skills add lebsral/DSPy-Programming-not-prompting-LMs-skills --skill ai-do

平台分布

Codex

35.67%
按下载量换算53

Claude

29.35%
按下载量换算43

Cursor

19.66%
按下载量换算29

Gemini CLI

11.1%
按下载量换算16

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

可疑

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。来源安全扫描存在提醒或未通过项,安装前请自行复核。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills