eval-agent

Evaluating agent tools for safe delegation requires scoring them against structural criteria like persistent memory, inspectable artifacts, and compounding context to predict if delegation will succeed or silently fail. This process produces a numeric scorecard and risk assessment.

Comparing agent platforms involves running them through a three-question structural framework that quantifies memory persistence, artifact transparency, and context handling. This generates an auditable risk assessment and a clear scorecard to identify gaps across multiple evaluation scenarios.

Creating a delegation spec for an agent involves identifying its structural gaps and generating explicit compensation recommendations and guardrails. This produces a ready-to-use document that patches weaknesses and defines safe operating boundaries.

You should not trust an autonomous agent when it lacks persistent memory, inspectable artifacts, or compounding context. These structural deficiencies predict silent delegation failures, requiring a generated delegation spec with explicit compensating guardrails before operation.

Agent evaluation using this structural scoring framework requires no external dependencies or components. It independently assesses any agent tool or platform against three core questions to produce a risk assessment and delegation spec.

The three structural questions that predict silent delegation failure assess whether the agent tool possesses persistent memory, generates inspectable artifacts, and supports compounding context. Low scores in these areas indicate high delegation risk.