all writing
Evals2026-06-10 · 6 min

Is the model still good? Treating evals as a test, not a hope

Models drift, prompts rot, providers change. A real-LLM eval harness turns "seems fine" into a number you can gate a release on.

by Siddharth Harsh Raj

Unit tests tell you your code works. They tell you nothing about whether your agent is any good — whether it still picks the right tool, fixes the right error, and doesn't regress when you tweak a prompt or bump a model. That gap is where a lot of GenAI quietly rots.

So the Avni Skills SDK ships two kinds of confidence: 463 deterministic unit tests for the machinery, and a real-LLM eval harness for the agent itself.

Scoring the agent, release over release

release candidate
eval suite
real LLM
semantic audit
score vs last
regression?
ship / hold
Quality becomes a gate, the same way tests do.
Model quality is a CI concern, not a hope. If you can't measure whether the agent got worse, you'll find out from your users.

The cheap insurance nobody buys

Eval harnesses feel like overhead until the first time a "harmless" prompt tweak silently degrades your agent and you catch it before release instead of after. It's the same instinct as writing tests — you're buying the ability to change things without fear. For GenAI, where the non-determinism lives in the model, that insurance is even more valuable.

The harness and the audit are in the open-source repo on GitHub.


Building something with AI agents?
I'm open to senior remote roles.
Get in touch