Agentic AI System Design / Reference / Template

Eval plan template

What to measure, on which data, with which release gate, across components, trajectories, and outcomes.

1. Task and release decision

  • System/task:
  • User outcome:
  • Change being evaluated:
  • Baseline release:
  • Candidate release:
  • Decision: ship / shadow / canary / reject / collect more evidence
  • Highest-risk regression:

2. Evaluation layers

LayerUnit under testExample metricGrader
DeterministicSchema/policy/state/tool adapterpass rateExact test
ComponentOne bounded model taskentity resolution accuracyReference/structured
Tool selectionProposed action and argumentsrequired-tool recallTrace rule
TrajectoryFull decision/action pathprohibited action, loop rateRule + calibrated judge
OutcomeFinal user artifactclaim support, usefulnessStructured + human/model
SafetyAttack and policy behaviorisolation failuresDeterministic/adversarial
OperationsRuntime behaviorP95 latency/cost/recoveryTelemetry

3. Dataset composition

SetPurposeCountRefresh
GoldenRepresentative regression
EdgeAmbiguous and tail cases
AdversarialSecurity/abuse
IncidentPast failuresContinuous
Fresh holdoutGeneralization checkPer major release
Production sampleDrift/human reviewOngoing

For every case store:

  • case ID and tags;
  • fixture version;
  • expected required and prohibited behavior;
  • reference claims/outcome;
  • risk tier;
  • cost/latency budgets;
  • grader versions;
  • reviewer provenance.

4. Metrics

Quality

  • task accuracy;
  • evidence coverage;
  • citation correctness;
  • conflict recall;
  • unsupported-claim rate;
  • human correction;
  • escalation correctness.

Behavior

  • correct next action;
  • required-tool recall;
  • prohibited-tool rate;
  • redundant/repeated call rate;
  • no-progress loops;
  • finish-too-early;
  • budget compliance.

Safety

  • prompt-injection success;
  • cross-tenant access;
  • unauthorized effect;
  • secret leakage;
  • memory poisoning;
  • sandbox escape;
  • audit failure.

Operations

  • valid completion;
  • P50/P95/P99 latency;
  • cost distribution;
  • retry count;
  • recovery after failure;
  • queue time;
  • fallback rate.

Segment by risk, tenant, source, language, input size, model/prompt/workflow version, and failure category.

5. Grader design

For each metric record:

  • deterministic versus model/human grader;
  • rubric;
  • evidence available to grader;
  • calibration dataset;
  • agreement/error analysis;
  • threshold;
  • known blind spots.

Prefer exact and structured checks before model judges.

6. Release gates

Safety-critical:
- prohibited autonomous actions = 0
- cross-tenant failures = 0
- approval bypass = 0

Quality:
- no material regression in required high-risk metrics
- citation correctness meets target
- holdout performance within confidence bounds

Operations:
- P95 latency within SLO
- P95 cost within approved budget
- crash recovery and duplicate-effect suite pass

Define sample-size and uncertainty rules. Do not make a release decision from a tiny noisy set.

7. Online plan

  • shadow percentage and duration;
  • canary population;
  • risk-stratified sampling;
  • human-review sample;
  • telemetry and trace completeness;
  • rollback triggers;
  • incident-to-regression process;
  • data-retention/privacy controls.

8. Result report

Include:

  1. decision and confidence;
  2. baseline versus candidate table;
  3. segmented regressions;
  4. representative passing and failing traces;
  5. cost/latency movement;
  6. safety results;
  7. grader limitations;
  8. recommended rollout and monitoring;
  9. new permanent eval cases.