# Knowing How to Edit: Reliable Evaluation Signals for Diagnosing and Optimizing Prompts at Query Level

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.19829 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.19829/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 20 of its 22 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 25 Nov 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 20 of 20)

- [Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14168/) (2021)
- [Let's Verify Step by Step](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.20050/) (2023)
- [Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.17651/) (2023)
- [GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.12022/) (2023)
- [Challenging BIG-Bench Tasks and Whether Chain-of-Thought Can Solve Them](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.09261/) (2022)
- [What Disease does this Patient Have? A Large-scale Open Domain Question Answering Dataset from Medical Exams](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.13081/) (2020)
- [Fantastically Ordered Prompts and Where to Find Them: Overcoming Few-Shot Prompt Order Sensitivity](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2104.08786/) (2021)
- [Large Language Models Are Human-Level Prompt Engineers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.01910/) (2022)
- [Large Language Models as Optimizers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.03409/) (2023)
- [CRITIC: Large Language Models Can Self-Correct with Tool-Interactive Critiquing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.11738/) (2023)
- [Automatic Prompt Optimization with "Gradient Descent" and Beam Search](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.03495/) (2023)
- [TextGrad: Automatic "Differentiation" via Text](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.07496/) (2024)
- [PromptAgent: Strategic Planning with Language Models Enables Expert-level Prompt Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.16427/) (2023)
- [Query-Dependent Prompt Evaluation and Optimization with Offline Inverse RL](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.06553/) (2023)
- [Instance-adaptive Zero-shot Chain-of-Thought Prompting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.20441/) (2024)
- [Beyond Prompt Content: Enhancing LLM Performance via Content-Format Integrated Prompt Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.04295/) (2025)
- [QPO: Query-dependent Prompt Optimization via Multi-Loop Offline Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.10504/) (2024)
- [Prompt Stability Matters: Evaluating and Optimizing Auto-Generated Prompt in General-Purpose Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.13546/) (2025)
- [ProRefine: Inference-Time Prompt Refinement with Textual Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.05305/) (2025)
- [Information Theoretic Lower Bounds on Negative Log Likelihood](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.06395/) (2019)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [PEEM: Prompt Engineering Evaluation Metrics for Interpretable Joint Evaluation of Prompts and Responses](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.10477/) (2026)
- [Beyond Aggregate Accuracy: Item-Level Transitions in Prompt Optimization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.19084/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Prompt optimization has become a central mechanism for eliciting strong performance from LLMs, and recent work has made substantial progress by proposing diverse prompt evaluation metrics and optimization strategies. Despite these advances, prompt evaluation and prompt optimization are often developed in isolation, limiting the extent to which evaluation can effectively inform prompt refinement. In this work, we study prompt optimization as a process guided by performance-relevant evaluation signals. To address the disconnect between evaluation and optimization, we propose an evaluation-instructed prompt optimization approach that explicitly connects prompt evaluation with query-dependent optimization. Our method integrates multiple complementary prompt quality metrics into a performance-reflective evaluation framework and trains an execution-free evaluator that predicts prompt quality directly from text, avoiding repeated model executions. These evaluation signals then guide prompt refinement in a targeted and interpretable manner. Empirically, the proposed evaluator achieves 83.7% accuracy in predicting prompt performance. When incorporated into the optimization process, our approach consistently outperforms existing optimization baselines across eight benchmark datasets and three different backbone LLMs. Overall, our results demonstrate that reliable and efficient evaluation signals can serve as an effective foundation for robust and interpretable prompt optimization.