AI workflow reliability

Test the workflow before you trust the workflow.

Independent tests of AI agents, RAG pipelines, and automation stacks. We measure failure rate, correction time, cost, and where human review belongs.

Same workload. Same inputs. Methods published. Failures included.

Failure surface

01Inputinspect
02Retrievalinspect
03Reasoninginspect
04Tool calltrace
05Actiongate
06Handoffinspect
07Outcomeinspect

Latest test results

Evidence is the standard. It is not a launch decoration.

TEST QUEUE

No controlled result is published yet.

EvalMechanics does not label a claim TESTED until the workload, inputs, method, raw result, failure modes, correction burden, and limitations can travel with it.

Read the test standard →

Signature utility

Map the places an AI workflow can quietly become expensive.

A short, local assessment across the seven points where errors either remain cheap—or reach a customer, record, payment, or irreversible action.

Run Failure Map
01Input

What enters the workflow?

02Retrieval

What context is missing?

03Reasoning

What conclusion is unsupported?

04Tool call

What external system is called?

05Action

What changes for real?

06Handoff

Who owns the exception?

07Outcome

Can the outcome be verified?

Compare AI stacks

Compare the mechanism, not the demo.

Coverage, review points, correction cost, and failure visibility are the useful comparison fields.

Comparison queue →

Failure files

Keep the failure attached to the claim.

Every future file will carry its operating context, failure mode, recovery path, and retest condition.

Failure file queue →

Field guides

Move the human to the expensive failure.

Practical guides will begin where a workflow is hard to observe, reverse, or safely delegate.

Guide queue →

How we classify evidence

Tested, researched, and unverified are different states.

TESTED
We ran the workload and published the conditions and limits.
RESEARCHED
We verified primary documentation, pricing, or source material. It is not a hands-on result.
RETEST DUE
A material model, product, integration, or policy change makes an earlier result stale.

Get the next test

Subscriptions will open with the first independently repeatable result.

Until then, the useful action is to map your own failure surface—not join an empty list.