1. Define the MCP task boundary
List the tools an agent may call, the data each tool may expose, and one failure that must block release.
←Back to Skill Directory
DevOps & InfrastructureOfficial Verified
promptfoo
BYpromptfoo★ 18,648GRADE A
promptfoo helps teams test prompts, agents, and RAG systems through repeatable eval suites, red-team checks, provider comparisons, and CI-friendly quality gates.
⚡Config Installation
Add this to your claude_desktop_config.json:
{
"mcpServers": {
"promptfoo": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"@modelcontextprotocol/server-promptfoo"
]
}
}
}* Note: Requires restart of Claude Desktop app.
Deployment Infrastructure
Editorial decision guide
Direct answer: use promptfoo as an MCP quality supervisor, not a runtime orchestrator
promptfoo is useful around an MCP-enabled agent when you need repeatable evaluation, red-team checks, and release gates before a tool-enabled workflow reaches users. It can test an MCP server as a target, inspect tool-call behavior, and attach pass/fail evidence to CI. It does not route live agent traffic, assign work between agents, or replace an MCP gateway. Use it to supervise quality and permission risk before release; use an orchestrator or gateway when the runtime itself needs coordination.
Use promptfoo when
- Teams that need to test MCP tool calls, data access, and prompt-injection exposure before release.
- Agent owners who want repeatable pass/fail evidence in CI instead of one-off manual demos.
- Security reviewers comparing a changed tool policy, model, prompt, or MCP server configuration.
Do not use it as
- You need a live control plane to route requests, schedule agents, or manage runtime retries.
- The team has no fixed user task, expected tool behavior, or accountable release owner to evaluate.
- You only need general tracing after production; use an observability tool alongside evaluation instead.
MCP supervisor workflow
2. Run evaluation and red-team checks
Use a small golden set for expected behavior, then test MCP-specific risks such as tool manipulation, prompt leakage, and unauthorized discovery.
3. Attach a release gate to CI
Record the commit, configuration, pass threshold, and failing cases so the next change can be compared instead of re-tested from memory.
Adoption Framework for promptfoo
Before installing any skill, define a clear objective and measurable outcome. A useful implementation question is: what workflow becomes faster, safer, or more reliable after this skill is active? If that answer is vague, delay rollout and tighten scope first.
For most teams, a low-risk pattern is preview-first rollout with one owner, one test scenario, and one rollback plan. Capture failures in a structured log so quality decisions are evidence-based. This is especially important for skills that touch file systems, external APIs, or automation chains with downstream side effects.
- Define success metrics before installation.
- Validate permission scope against policy boundaries.
- Run one controlled pilot and document failure categories.
- Promote only after acceptance checks pass consistently.
Pre-Deployment Review Questions
Use these questions before enabling the skill in shared environments. They reduce surprise incidents and make approval decisions consistent across teams.
- What data can this skill read, write, or transmit by default?
- Which failures are recoverable automatically and which require manual stop?
- Do we have verifiable logs that prove safe behavior under load?
- Is rollback tested, documented, and assigned to a clear owner?
If any answer is unclear, keep rollout in preview and close the gap before production use.
Editorial Review Snapshot
This listing includes an editorial QA layer in addition to automated rendering. Review status is based on documentation depth, content uniqueness, and operational safety signals from the upstream repository.
- Last scan date: 2026-05-14
- README depth: 740 words
- Content diversity score: 0.58 (higher is better)
- Template signal count: 0
- Index status: Index eligible
Recommendation: Candidate for production rollout after permission scope is confirmed and rollback drills are documented.
Skill Implementation Board
Actionable utility module for rollout decisions. Use the inputs below to choose a deployment path, then execute the checklist and record an output note.
Input: Security Grade
A
Input: Findings
0
Input: README Depth
740 words
Input: Index State
Eligible
| Decision Trigger | Action | Expected Output |
|---|---|---|
| Input: risk band low, docs partial, findings 0 | Run a preview pilot with fixed ownership and observability checkpoints. | Pilot can start with rollback checklist attached. |
| Input: page is index-eligible | Proceed with external documentation and team onboarding draft. | Reusable rollout runbook ready for team adoption. |
| Input: context tags/scenarios are missing | Define two concrete scenarios before broad rollout. | Clear scope definition before further deployment. |
Execution Steps
- Capture objective, owner, and rollback contact.
- Run one preview pilot with fixed test scenario.
- Record warning behavior and recovery evidence.
- Promote only if pilot output matches expected threshold.
Output Template
skill=promptfoo mode=A pilot_result=pass|fail warning_count=0 next_step=rollout|patch|hold
🛡️ Security Analysis
SCANNED: 2026-05-14
SCORE: 90/100
✅
Clean Scan Report
Our static analysis engine detected no common vulnerabilities (RCE, API Leaks, Unbounded FS).
DocumentationREADME.md
Note: The content below is automatically rendered from the repository's README file.
promptfoo rollout guide for AI agent teams
What this skill is
promptfoo helps teams test prompts, agents, and RAG systems through repeatable eval suites, red-team checks, provider comparisons, and CI-friendly quality gates. The repository behind this listing is https://github.com/promptfoo/promptfoo, maintained by promptfoo. AgentSkillsHub treats this page as a practical implementation guide rather than a generic repository mirror, so the focus is how a team should evaluate, integrate, and govern the tool inside a real AI agent workflow.
The important decision is not whether the project is popular. The important decision is whether the project solves a specific operational problem in your stack. For promptfoo, that problem is connected to prompt regression testing, agent red teaming, rag quality gates. If your team cannot name the workflow, owner, data boundary, and rollback path, the project should stay in a sandbox until those answers are clear.
When to use it
- Teams that need to stop prompt changes from breaking production behavior silently.
- Security reviewers who need repeatable red-team probes for jailbreaks, leakage, and unsafe completions.
- RAG owners who want to compare answer quality across retrieval settings, prompts, and model versions.
Use promptfoo when it reduces operational ambiguity. A good adoption path starts with one bounded workflow, one owner, one quality target, and one failure mode that the team agrees to measure. The tool should not enter a shared agent platform simply because it has high GitHub stars or strong community momentum.
Setup workflow
- Create a small golden dataset before trying to automate every prompt scenario.
- Run local evals during development and a stricter CI suite before release branches merge.
- Track pass rates by model, prompt version, retrieval config, and application release.
After the first working run, create a short internal runbook. The runbook should include installation steps, required environment variables, minimum supported versions, expected outputs, known failure modes, and the exact command used for smoke testing. This makes later agent work reviewable because the human reviewer can reproduce the same path.
Security and governance checklist
- Keep sensitive eval fixtures out of public repos and sanitize transcripts before sharing.
- Review red-team findings as security evidence, not just quality notes.
- Make failure thresholds explicit so releases cannot ignore a known regression.
The most common mistake is treating agent tooling as isolated developer convenience. In practice, these tools touch prompts, repositories, model traffic, logs, datasets, credentials, and sometimes customer content. Add the tool to your normal dependency review process, assign an owner, and document what data can pass through it before expanding usage.
Evaluation plan
Start with three checks. First, run a happy-path task that reflects real work, not a demo prompt. Second, run a failure-path task where credentials are missing, a provider times out, or the model returns a poor result. Third, run a regression task after changing configuration. The evaluation should produce evidence that a future reviewer can inspect without rerunning the entire experiment.
Recommended evidence:
- Prompt regression testing
- Agent red teaming
- RAG quality gates
For production teams, the minimum bar is a repeatable smoke test, a cost or latency measurement, and a clear rollback instruction. Teams with compliance requirements should add log retention limits, data masking checks, and approval rules for any command that can write files, call external APIs, or change infrastructure.
Add one human-readable acceptance note beside the automated result. That note should say what changed, what did not change, who approved the risk, and which follow-up would block wider rollout. This keeps the evaluation useful for future maintainers instead of turning it into a one-time green check.
Alternatives to compare
Compare promptfoo against at least two nearby options before standardizing it. The right alternative depends on the workflow: OpenAI Cookbook for reference implementations, LiteLLM for routing and gateway control, Langfuse for observability, promptfoo for evals and red teaming, and Hugging Face Transformers for local model experiments. The winner should be the tool that gives your team the clearest operating model, not the one with the broadest feature list.
Editorial recommendation
AgentSkillsHub recommends a staged rollout. Keep the first use case narrow, require human review of generated outputs, and promote the tool only after it has passed a smoke test, a failure-mode test, and a documentation review. This page was updated on 2026-05-14 for the flagship content batch so the skill can participate in static export, sitemap coverage, and internal linking.
Related Use Cases
AE
AgentSkillsHub Editorial TeamAI Agent Infrastructure Reviewers
The AgentSkillsHub editorial team evaluates MCP servers, Claude skills, and AI agent integrations for security, reliability, and practical deployment readiness. Every listing undergoes permission audit, README analysis, and operational risk triage before publication.
- Reviewed 450+ MCP server repositories
- Developed security grading methodology (A-F)
- Published agent deployment safety guidelines