Agentic Evaluation
Evaluate AI agents in production: task completion metrics, trajectory analysis, and automated agent quality benchmarks.
Last updated
Grading Agents: Agentic Evaluation
Evaluating an agent is not like evaluating a model. There’s no single output to score — there’s a non-deterministic, multi-step trajectory that can reach the right answer the wrong way, or the wrong answer competently. This is how you grade the difference.
A one-shot model gives you one output; you score it against a reference and move on. An agent takes a path — it plans, calls tools, reads results, re-plans, and stops when it decides it’s done. Two runs of the same task take different paths, and both “84% correct” can hide wildly different behavior. So agent evaluation splits in two: outcome (did it achieve the goal?) and trajectory (was the path sound — efficient, safe, non-looping?). You need both, because an agent that gets the right answer by luck after twelve wrong tool calls is a production incident waiting to happen.
Related
More in LLM & Agentic
LLM Lifecycle
PreviewComplete lifecycle of large language models from pre-training through fine-tuning, RLHF, and deployment — with architecture diagrams and production considerations.
How LLMs Call Tools
PreviewHow LLMs use function calling and tool use — the mechanics behind tool-calling agents, from prompt engineering to structured output.
When to Fine-Tune: The Decision Framework
PreviewShould you fine-tune at all? A structured decision framework for prompt engineering vs RAG vs fine-tuning.
LoRA, QLoRA & PEFT Methods
PreviewHow LoRA works inside transformer layers, QLoRA for memory-efficient training, and the full PEFT method comparison with code examples.
Get full access to all 87+ sections with code examples, diagrams, and interactive animations.
Unlock Premium