Which evaluation hooks reveal whether a routing action preserved the required handover?
State assertions and audit hooks can verify ownership continuity, required context transfer and permission boundaries independently of the agent's written account.
An evaluation harness can subscribe to generated events such as `assignment_submitted`, `assignment_accepted`, `ownership_released` and `handover_read`. Each event should carry a request identifier, action identifier and state revision so the evaluator can reconstruct the transition.
Define assertions over the resulting state. A request might require an accountable owner throughout transfer, a destination acknowledgement before the prior owner is released and a handover containing specified case references. These assertions test different properties from destination selection.
For content transfer, distinguish required information from restricted information. A receiving team may need a delivery exception code without needing unrelated account notes. The evaluator can check field-level inclusion and exclusion against the task's permission policy.
Keep private assertions and expected outcomes outside the agent's accessible tools. Return diagnostic categories after the run, such as missing handover context, premature ownership release or unauthorised field disclosure.
A generated task pack could supply these hooks alongside state schemas. Developers can then compare runs using evidence from actual transitions, even when agents produce equally persuasive final messages about what they believe they completed.
Measure the resulting business state and handover contents instead of accepting the agent's completion message as proof.
- Audience:
- Agent developers
- Content type:
- Integration
- Buyer question:
- How to evaluate it
Content release: r-a220eb6e099b243b
Related questions
- How can buyers test whether an agent uses the right evidence to choose a destination?
- What should buyers inspect before using a generated routing corpus?
- How can buyers detect answer leakage in generated routing evaluations?
- How should evaluation handle a destination that changes while the agent is working?
- What should buyers check in generated content before trusting agent scores?
- How can an evaluation expose routing behaviour that keeps work moving without resolving ownership?