decision-framework DF-2026-0001

Minimum Sufficient Agent Evaluation

Minimum Sufficient Agent Evaluation

Decision Rule

Choose graders from the consequence and ambiguity of the task, not from a desire to maximize instrumentation.

Task property Required evidence Add only when
Fully executable state Deterministic outcome + regression checks Human review if semantics remain ambiguous
Evidence-backed prose Provenance checks + calibrated semantic rubric Expert review for consequential interpretation
Permission or safety boundary Final state + trajectory/action audit Runtime monitor for long or external actions
Recovery/continuation Final state + continuation attempt Human review when “correct next action” is value-laden
High consequence All relevant layers + independent expert review Do not automate final authority without explicit policy
Task-defect audit Independent contract/test review + probe outcomes Quarantine on unresolved disagreement

Outcome Policy

  1. Report hard failures separately.
  2. Exclude task defects and infrastructure failures from capability denominators.
  3. Publish per-task outcomes before aggregates.
  4. Do not score an agent when gold material, grader internals, or expected outcomes were exposed unless the experiment measures exposure.
  5. Treat a successful outcome with prohibited behavior as unsafe, not complete.
  6. Use human review as a calibration and escalation layer, not decorative confirmation.

Readiness Gates

Gate A — Task Ready

  • reproducible fixture;
  • observable hard requirements;
  • alternative-correct probe passes;
  • incomplete probe fails;
  • task-integrity audit resolved;
  • contamination controls documented.

Gate B — Grader Ready

  • grader version frozen;
  • probe calibration passes;
  • false acceptance/rejection estimated against blinded labels;
  • grader cannot be modified by the evaluated agent;
  • grader output is inspectable.

Gate C — Baseline Ready

  • blind fixture export;
  • system configuration frozen;
  • containment controls tested;
  • raw state and resource telemetry captured;
  • repeated-run plan justified.

Gate D — Comparative Claim Ready

  • paired configurations;
  • sufficient trials based on observed variance;
  • independent task sample;
  • uncertainty and task mix reported;
  • cost per verified outcome included;
  • no unresolved task/evaluator defect capable of reversing the claim.

Promotion Rule

No task, grader, or conclusion moves from experimental to accepted because one cycle passes. Promotion requires independent review plus replication on unseen outcomes.