Agent failures should become evals, not just traces
Summary
Advocates for treating agent failures as evaluation benchmarks rather than just trace logs, emphasizing the need for systematic testing of AI agent behaviors.
Similar Articles
Everyone says write evals for your agent. But what should you actually test?
A practical guide on writing effective evaluations for AI agents, focusing on starting from observed failures and using a mix of deterministic checks and LLM judges.
Production agent evals should test incident replay not just task success
Discusses that production agent evaluations should include failure replay and resume capabilities, not just happy-path task success, emphasizing the need for observability that enables recovery.
Log analysis is necessary for credible evaluation of AI agents
This paper argues that log analysis is essential for credible AI agent evaluation, as outcome-only benchmarks often fail to reveal underlying capabilities, safety risks, or failure modes.
The agent failures that get you aren't crashes. They're clean runs that did the wrong thing.
The article discusses how AI agents often fail silently by completing tasks incorrectly without crashing, leading to undetected errors. It highlights common failure modes and explores potential detection strategies.
An Empirical Study of Automating Agent Evaluation
This paper introduces EvalAgent, a system that automates the evaluation of AI agents by encoding domain-specific expertise, addressing the limitations of standard coding assistants in this task. It also presents AgentEvalBench, a benchmark for testing evaluation pipelines, and demonstrates significant improvements in evaluation reliability.