Evaluation and Monitoring

Production-ready safety evaluation framework measuring AI system responses across 12 hazard categories with standardized testing protocols for deployment decisions.

The original AgentBench study evaluated its published model roster across 8 diverse environments and multi-turn, open-ended settings.

Benchmarks LLM agents on consequential real-world tasks that would typically be completed by multiple job roles in a software engineering company.

Comprehensive benchmark for evaluating AI agents on open-ended machine learning research tasks from top ML conferences.

Production-ready methodology adapting 12-factor app principles for scalable, maintainable agent systems with comprehensive monitoring and evaluation.

Stanford CRFM's Holistic Evaluation of Language Models extended for agent capabilities. The worked example is a dated benchmark snapshot, not a current model recommendation.

Framework for human-in-the-loop evaluation and refinement of LLM-based agents, allowing engineers to guide and assess agent performance at each development stage.

Meta's comprehensive cybersecurity benchmark for evaluating security risks of LLM agents in autonomous and multi-agent settings.

Benchmark for measuring performance of frontier model agents on ML research engineering tasks, comparing against human expert capabilities.

Software engineering benchmark suite including SWE-bench, SWE-bench Verified, and SWE-bench Live. Named comparison models in the example are historical baselines.

The original GAIA benchmark tested reasoning, multimodality, browsing, and tool use. Its named model comparison is the paper's historical baseline.

Holistic benchmark evaluating agents across five domains with 20 tasks and 3K+ prompts. The example preserves its published-era model roster.

Comprehensive web agent evaluation including WebArena, VisualWebArena, and WorkArena for realistic web interaction testing in sandboxed environments.

European Union regulatory framework for AI agent evaluation with risk-based classification, GPAI model requirements, and mandatory compliance for deployment in EU.

AI Safety Institute's comprehensive evaluation framework for frontier AI systems, coordinated with NIST's AI safety work for government-standard safety assessment.

Multilingual benchmark for agent performance and security across 12 languages. The example is a dated benchmark snapshot rather than a current model recommendation.

Anthropic's framework for evaluating AI safety through constitutional principles, including jailbreak resistance testing and harmlessness assessment.

Production step-level tracing that records every model call, tool call, workflow step, and sub-agent as a span in a single run tree, annotated with token, latency, and cost metrics. Standardized through OpenTelemetry GenAI semantic conventions (gen_ai.* attributes) and surfaced in platforms like LangSmith, Braintrust, and Datadog, it is the live signal for debugging non-deterministic failures in production, distinct from offline benchmarks that score behavior before deployment.

Benchmark that places the agent between a simulated human user and a set of domain APIs (retail, airline) while it must obey a written policy document. Rather than checking a single response, it compares the final database state against a goal state after the full conversation. Its signature metric is pass^k, the probability of succeeding on all k independent trials of the same task, which exposes consistency failures that averaged pass@1 scores hide.

The development-lifecycle discipline of building agents and prompts against evals first. Curated golden datasets (roughly 50 to 500 cases weighted toward known failure modes) are version-controlled alongside the prompts, run as a regression suite on every pull request, and merge or promotion is gated on metric thresholds. The pipeline pins model and judge versions so a silent provider-side model update is detected as a regression instead of being quietly absorbed, and stages its checks as lint, then offline eval, then a cost gate before a change can merge. Distinct from agent-observability-tracing, which is runtime telemetry rather than pre-merge gating, and from fixed public benchmarks, which are not team-owned regression suites in CI.

The deployment side of shipping an agent or prompt version safely. The candidate first runs in shadow mode, executing on real production traffic while its output is withheld from users and compared offline against the served version, then graduates to a canary on 1 to 5 percent of live traffic scored by online evals against a control, then a progressive ramp, with automatic rollback the moment a monitored metric regresses. Pairing online evals (scoring live traffic in flight) with offline evals catches the long-tail failures a static golden set cannot predict. Distinct from eval-driven-agent-development, which gates changes offline before merge, whereas this governs the online ramp after merge.

An LLM-driven user simulator, parameterized by diverse personas such as confused, adversarial, impatient, or goal-shifting users, is used as a test harness that autonomously drives a conversational agent through many multi-turn dialogues. Running these simulated conversations at scale surfaces dropped context, policy violations, and hallucinations before real users encounter them, exploring branches of the dialogue tree that static single-turn golden cases cannot reach. It requires deliberate persona diversity and goal alignment to avoid the blind spot of a single cooperative simulator that behaves more agreeably than real users. Distinct from tau-bench, a fixed benchmark that embeds one user simulator, and from eval-driven-agent-development, whose goldens are static single-turn cases while this generates dynamic multi-turn traffic.