AI Agent Evaluation Evidence Diagnostic
Find the gaps between your release decision and the evidence behind it. Start with one agent workflow and a bounded set of questions.
Locate the missing evidence before deciding release
- Release requirement
- State the business outcome and unacceptable failure.
- Existing case
- Check which requirement the test actually exercises.
- Execution trace
- Connect the reported result to the action and final state.
- Coverage gap
- Name the unanswered question that could change release.
Decision and fit
Locate the missing evidence before deciding release
Compare the engagement with the decision you face
- A question worth resolving
- Locate the missing evidence before deciding release.
- An accountable participant
- Release owners and AI product leads deciding whether existing evaluation evidence is sufficient for a specific agent workflow.
- Inspectable source material
- The relevant owners can make workflow evidence and agreed inputs available for examination.
- A scope mismatch
- You need a new evaluation harness built as the main engagement.
The engagement
Find the gaps between your release decision and the evidence behind it. Start with one agent workflow and a bounded set of questions. A bounded diagnostic of one release decision, with evidence walkthroughs and a findings briefing.
The decision at stake
A release is approaching, but requirements, test results and unresolved failures do not tell a consistent story.
Suitable situations
- Release owners and AI product leads deciding whether existing evaluation evidence is sufficient for a specific agent workflow.
Less suitable situations
- You need a new evaluation harness built as the main engagement.
Engagement boundary
Agree the work and its boundaries together
The engagement boundary
- Release requirement
- Map release requirements to existing tests and trace evidence.
- Existing case
- The inputs, authorised access and client participants are confirmed before scheduling.
- Release owner
- Retains organisational decisions and risk acceptance.
- Additional implementation
- Building missing tests, implementing remediation and checking a later release are separately scoped. If your existing evidence already answers the release question, the useful conclusion may be to stop the diagnostic without adding another platform.
What the work covers
- Map release requirements to existing tests and trace evidence.
- Identify untested behaviours, contradictory results and evidence gaps.
- Prioritise further evaluation and document what the evidence does and does not support.
Scope boundaries
- Formal certification, legal conclusions and guarantees of safe or compliant behaviour.
- Implementation or ongoing operation beyond the agreed scope.
- Building missing tests, implementing remediation and checking a later release are separately scoped. If your existing evidence already answers the release question, the useful conclusion may be to stop the diagnostic without adding another platform.
Working sequence
How the work moves from question to handover
What each stage should leave your team with
- Select the release questions
Named release questions and consequential behaviours.
- Trace the existing evidence
Requirements linked to cases, graders and traces.
- Challenge the coverage
Missing cases and contradictory evidence made explicit.
- Brief the release owner
A decision brief with prioritised next checks.
How the work proceeds
- Select the release questions. Identify the consequential behaviours, intended users and workflow version that the release owner needs to judge.
- Trace the existing evidence. Read cases, grader criteria and execution traces together. Distinguish an asserted pass from evidence of the final business state.
- Challenge the coverage. Look for missing edge cases, contradictory findings and assumptions about tools or human intervention. Agree whether a limited rerun would resolve a gap.
- Brief the release owner. Hand over a requirements-to-evidence map, prioritised gaps and explicit unanswered questions, with owners for follow-up.
Decision artefacts
Leave a record the next owner can use
Requirements map
Illustrative working format
- Subject and version
- Identify the workflow, configuration or proposal examined.
- Release requirement
- Record the relevant requirement and supporting material.
- Execution trace
- State the observation, supporting evidence and remaining uncertainty.
- Release owner
- Record the next decision, follow-up and unresolved question.
What the work can produce
- Requirements-to-evidence map
- Prioritised evaluation gaps
- Decision brief with limitations
Worked situation
Follow one situation through to a bounded next decision
Illustrative working situation
Illustrative scenario
- Starting condition
An apparent pass has no trace of the final record.
- Question to examine
Inspect the requirement, case and resulting state together.
- Possible next action
Request the missing evidence before relying on the pass.
Working together
Your team and our team need a clear working agreement
Who contributes and who decides
- Client sponsor
- Confirms the decision, priorities and people needed to resolve it.
- Client technical or process owner
- Provides the agreed evidence, access and review of findings or deliverables.
- Softlander delivery lead
- Coordinates the agreed activities, review points, handover and open actions.
- Authorised decision-maker
- Accepts deliverables against the agreed criteria and separately decides operational or business action.
What the work depends on
- Your release owner, workflow specialist and evaluation engineer supply the release criteria, existing cases, representative execution traces and known failures. Reserve time for an evidence walkthrough and a findings challenge session.
Engagement availability
The start date, named delivery roles, review points and fee basis are agreed after confirming the inputs and scope. Duration depends on evidence access, system complexity and the time your decision-makers need to review the work.
Engagement and handover
Agree the delivery model and what completion means
A clear agreement from scope to ownership
- Scoped work
- Map release requirements to existing tests and trace evidence.
- Indicative handover
- Requirements-to-evidence map; Prioritised evaluation gaps
- Review and acceptance
- Review the agreed deliverables and record any open items, owners and conditions.
- Ongoing work
- Assign maintenance and operational ownership; agree additional scope and coverage explicitly.
A bounded diagnostic of one release decision, with evidence walkthroughs and a findings briefing.
The handover connects each agreed release question to available evidence, a specific gap or an unresolved dependency. Your release owner reviews the coverage and assigns the next evaluation actions; receiving the report does not mean accepting the agent for release.
Building missing tests, implementing remediation and checking a later release are separately scoped. If your existing evidence already answers the release question, the useful conclusion may be to stop the diagnostic without adding another platform.