Pattern [19]

Evaluation & Monitoring

Integration Testing / Observability / APM (Datadog/New Relic)

> Agentic Definition

Frameworks for measuring agent performance (accuracy, faithfulness, tool usage) and monitoring behavior in production (traces, logs).

> Description

Frameworks for measuring agent performance (accuracy, faithfulness, tool usage) and monitoring behavior in production (traces, logs).

≈ How It Maps to Integration Testing / Observability

Tracking system health and correctness.

≠ Key Divergence

"Correctness" is subjective. Traditional metrics (Latency, Error Rate) are insufficient. You need "LLM-as-a-Judge" metrics to score "Correctness," "Hallucination Rate," and "Tone."

> Key Takeaway

Adapt: Testing is no longer binary. It is statistical. You are managing "Quality Assurance" via AI judges.

Frequently Asked Questions

When should I use the Evaluation & Monitoring pattern?

Frameworks for measuring agent performance (accuracy, faithfulness, tool usage) and monitoring behavior in production (traces, logs).

How does Evaluation & Monitoring relate to Integration Testing / Observability / APM (Datadog/New Relic)?

Tracking system health and correctness. However, there is a key divergence: "Correctness" is subjective. Traditional metrics (Latency, Error Rate) are insufficient. You need "LLM-as-a-Judge" metrics to score "Correctness," "Hallucination Rate," and "Tone."

What are the production trade-offs of Evaluation & Monitoring?

Continuous evaluation in production is required to detect "drift" (model behavior changing over time due to updates or data changes).

Sign up to unlock code examples & production notes

Get full access to all 21 patterns with code comparisons, production considerations, and architecture diagrams.

No credit card required.