- Author
- Creative Ventures engineering
- Published
- Read time
- 10 min read
LLM evaluation: a practical playbook for production agents
Most teams never get past vibes-based LLM evaluation. Here is the evaluation harness we run on every production agent — golden sets, three-layer scoring, and when to stop adding coverage.

Every team we talk to is running some form of LLM evaluation. Most of them are running it wrong. Usually the issue is not the model — it is the measurement. This is the LLM evaluation playbook we run on every production agent, stripped of the parts that only sound good in conference talks.
Start with a golden set, not a metric
The first artifact in any LLM evaluation is 40 hand-curated examples that represent the shape of your traffic. Not 400, not 4,000 — 40. Small enough that a human can actually read them, large enough to catch category-level regressions. Every time a production bug surfaces, the failing example goes into the golden set.

The three-layer scoring model for LLM agents
We score every agent response at three layers. Hard constraints — did it call the right tool, did the output validate against the schema. Correctness — for verifiable tasks, is the answer actually right. Judgment — did a second model rate the response usable. The layers are not weighted: a failure on any layer is a failure.


When to stop evaluating and start listening to production
More eval is not always better. Once the agent passes the golden set at >95%, the next regression will almost certainly come from a category you did not predict, not a marginal drop in accuracy. That is the point to stop adding coverage and start adding telemetry from production to feed back in.
“The eval harness is a forcing function for understanding your own product. If you cannot write the test, you do not know the feature well enough to ship it.”
More builds from the shelf.
Same team, different problems. Recent cases in adjacent industries — each shipped with the senior people who own outcomes.
Notes from people who shipped.
Real reviews from founders, CTOs and PMs we shipped alongside. Not curated soundbites — actual sentences from launch retros.
· Parsewise®
They rebuilt our entire platform in 4 months. Performance improved 3×, and the codebase is finally something our team can maintain on their own.
· Wishboard®
From zero to 50k users in 6 months. The team handled everything — design, development, and launch marketing. We just focused on the product.
· RLC®
We needed 5 senior engineers fast. They embedded with our team, matched our coding standards, and shipped features alongside our full-timers.
· Blured®
The AI agent they built handles 70% of our support tickets. Response time dropped from hours to seconds.
Before we get started — what teams ask us most.
With a discovery phase. We interview stakeholders, audit existing systems, and map the competitive landscape. You get a written roadmap before any code is written.
MANIFESTO
Two-week sprints. Senior engineers from day one. Code that reaches production, products people actually use, and a team that stays through launch.
Stop piloting. Start shipping.
A 30-minute call to clarify your next steps. Zero obligations — bring a brief, a deadline or a half-formed idea, leave with a written plan.
Book a call
A 30-minute call to map the brief, your deadline, and what would actually move the needle.
/02Get an offer
Written estimate within 48 hours — scope, team, milestones and a fixed price you can sign off on.
/03Pay & start
Sign the SOW, pay the first milestone, kick off the same week. No multi-month onboarding theatre.
/04Ship in 2 weeks
First working sprint goes live in 14 days — real demo on a staging URL you can hand to customers.





