Engineering

Engineering

Evals for agents: test the decision, not the sentence

Evals for agents: test the decision, not the sentence

String-matching outputs is the wrong way to test agents. Score the decisions and actions instead — here’s how our eval suites work.

String-matching outputs is the wrong way to test agents. Score the decisions and actions instead — here’s how our eval suites work.

Portrait of Theo Marchetti

Theo Marchetti

7 min read

Abstract data illustration for “Evals for agents: test the decision, not the sentence”

Two replies can be worded completely differently and both be right. Two refunds can look identical and one of them be wrong. That’s why we evaluate agents on decisions and actions, not text.

What an eval case contains

  • A recorded trigger and the tool outputs from a real run

  • The expected decision, such as eligible or not eligible

  • Constraints on actions: amount, recipient, field values

  • Optional rubric for tone, scored separately

Replay makes evals cheap

Because tool outputs are recorded, eval runs don’t touch production systems and finish in seconds. Teams run their full suite on every change to an agent’s instructions, tools or model.

Grow the suite from production

Every disagreement in shadow mode and every human correction becomes a new case. The best suites we see are built almost entirely from real runs.

Portrait of Theo Marchetti

WRITTEN BY

Theo Marchetti

Co-founder & CTO

Theo spent a decade building workflow and queueing infrastructure. At Cairn he leads the runtime: execution, tracing and the tool sandbox.

Field notes

One email a month. Only the useful parts.

Lessons from running agents in production, new templates and the releases worth knowing about. Unsubscribe in one click.

Create a free website with Framer, the website builder loved by startups, designers and agencies.