Human evaluation plays a crucial role in Natural Language Processing (NLP) as it assesses the quality and relevance of developed systems, thereby facilitating their enhancement. However, the absence of widely accepted human evaluation metrics in NLP hampers fair comparisons among different systems and the establishment of universal assessment standards. Through an extensive analysis of existing literature on human evaluation metrics, we identified several gaps in NLP evaluation methodologies. These gaps served as motivation for developing our own hierarchical evaluation framework. The proposed framework offers notable advantages, particularly in providing a more comprehensive representation of the NLP system's performance. We applied this framework to evaluate the developed Machine Reading Comprehension system, which was utilized within a human-AI symbiosis model. The results highlighted the associations between the quality of inputs and outputs, underscoring the necessity to evaluate both components rather than solely focusing on outputs. In future work, we will investigate the potential time-saving benefits of our proposed framework for evaluators assessing NLP systems.