01Research
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.

LLM evaluation dashboard — golden set and scoring layers

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.

LLM golden set — hand-curated evaluation examples
Golden set — 40 examples, a paragraph of commentary each, owned by a human.

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.

Hard constraint checker for LLM outputs
LLM judgment layer evaluation dashboard

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.
Internal engineering note
03WHAT CLIENTS SAY

Notes from people who shipped.

Real reviews from founders, CTOs and PMs we shipped alongside. Not curated soundbites — actual sentences from launch retros.

WHAT THEY SAY/01

· 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.

Alex
AlexCTO · Parsewise
WHAT THEY SAY/02

· Wishboard®

From zero to 50k users in 6 months. The team handled everything — design, development, and launch marketing. We just focused on the product.

Marina
MarinaFounder · Trywishboard
WHAT THEY SAY/03

· RLC®

We needed 5 senior engineers fast. They embedded with our team, matched our coding standards, and shipped features alongside our full-timers.

Dmitri
DmitriVP Engineering · RLC
WHAT THEY SAY/04

· Blured®

The AI agent they built handles 70% of our support tickets. Response time dropped from hours to seconds.

Kate
KateProduct Lead · Blured
04FREQUENTLY ASKED

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.