How can we tell whether an agent learned routing logic or superficial shortcuts?

**What is the most useful check beyond held-out accuracy?**

Use paired cases that isolate a single change. One pair can preserve the business facts while changing wording, layout or record identifiers. Another can preserve the wording while changing a fact that should alter the destination.

**What should remain stable?**

In a healthcare administration task, changing a booking request from a formal letter to a concise portal message should leave ownership unchanged when the appointment type and administrative requirements remain identical. A routing change suggests sensitivity to presentation rather than the supplied rules.

**What should change?**

Changing the appointment from a new booking to an amendment of an existing specialist booking can require a different owner if the provided policy says so. An unchanged answer then indicates that the agent ignored a governing fact.

**How do we keep this check trustworthy?**

Review each pair to ensure the edit introduces no unintended clues or contradictions. Keep related variants in the same dataset partition. Report invariance and required-change results separately, because an agent that always selects one queue can appear stable while failing to respond to meaningful differences.