LangSmith
Existing datasets, evaluation, and tracing workflows.
Official evaluation documentation ↗The proposed platform / Evidence travels together
From source
to release context.
A proposed fixture-only lab layered onto the existing evaluation process. The platform connects the evidence chain; it does not imply a live integration.
Explore the platform↓THE EVIDENCE CHAIN01 → 05
Start with the source and its sharing boundary.
Trust DeskSource → scenarioProposed module ↗
Trust ReviewScenario → run setProposed module ↗
Trust ProofRun → failure transitionProposed module ↗
Trust SignalCriterion → decisionProposed module ↗
Trust ReportException → evidenceProposed module ↗Shared recordFixture + version + condition + seed + artifact + human criterionRetained in each mock report
Named boundaries
Model the response.
Keep production outside.
Stub tools make the concept demo deterministic. An eventual pilot would need approved trace access, controlled replay, explicit data handling, and named ownership.
Inspect trust & scope
Read diagram description
Fixture-only study boundary excludes production calls, secrets, billing, and external writes
Existing-stack fit
Test what the
current gate misses.
Generic evaluation dashboards overlap with established tools. The proposed wedge is independent failure analysis for costly, long-horizon workflows, evaluated against an agreed task criterion.
Braintrust
Existing online scoring for production traces.
Official scoring documentation ↗Factual comparators, not partners or endorsements.
A smaller test. A clearer decision.
Start with the workflow
you can’t afford to guess.
Agree on one task criterion, an approved fixture, and a named engineering owner.
Request a replay study