NightAgent

Evaluation Lab

How well Sam, Jordan, and Riley do, measured from what really happened: test runs and real calls. Every number shows how many runs or calls it's based on. Tests and real calls are kept apart because tests are controlled and real calls aren't. Anything judged by an AI grader is labeled that way.

Explore the lab

Each section answers a different engineering question about whether NightAgent can be trusted with real customer conversations.

The Scorecard provides a high-level view of NightAgent's current quality. It keeps controlled test results separate from real-call outcomes so the evidence behind each metric stays clear.

Engineering question: Can we trust the current version?

In tests

Loading…

On real calls

Loading…

Can we trust the AI judge?

A person scores real calls against the same written checks, without seeing the AI's verdict first (scripts/label_calls.py). Agreement is how often the two match; kappa discounts the matches chance alone would give (1 is perfect, 0 is no better than chance).

Loading…

Safety Watchdog

Back to lab menu ↑

Every real emergency should wake the on-call technician, fast. This checks every live emergency ticket: was the technician alerted, how long after the ticket was saved, and, if not, what the records say went wrong. Scripted scenarios never alert anyone, so they're left out.

Engineering question: Did any emergency slip through?

Loading…

Engineering Incidents

Back to lab menu ↑

What broke and how it was fixed. Real-world testing exposes problems scripted demos often miss. Every problem below happened in a live call, a new test, or when we broke something on purpose. "Now" is read from the latest test runs, so if a fix stops holding, it shows here.

Engineering question: What did we learn from failure?

Loading…

Regression Tests

Back to lab menu ↑

Most tests here started as a real problem found in a live call with Sam, Jordan, or Riley; the rest try something unexpected. Each one replays the conversation up to that moment and checks what the agent does next. They run in ElevenLabs Agent Testing against the live agents, three times each, because the same model can answer differently from one run to the next.

Engineering question: Did our changes break something that previously worked?

…Loading the latest results

The tests above are text. These use real audio: a test caller phones the live Sam the same way the demo page does and plays recorded speech, 20 milliseconds at a time, like a microphone. The callers are ElevenLabs voices, so no real customer is involved. Each call stops before a ticket is made, and these calls are left out of the real-call numbers.

Engineering question: Does it still work when the caller is hard to hear, talks over Sam, or goes quiet?

Loading…

Failure Injection

Back to lab menu ↑

Break something on purpose and check the system copes. Each scenario replays a known failure through the real server code in a sandbox: nothing reaches the live board and no real texts are sent. How Sam talks about it is covered by the regression tests above.

Engineering question: What happens when something goes wrong?

Same caller twice

A gate is stuck open. James calls; an emergency ticket is opened and the technician alerted. Twenty minutes later Dana, at the same site, calls about the same gate. Then the replay forces the mistake a model might make: alerting the technician a second time.

Alert service down

Priya's main entrance won't unlock, so it's an emergency. The service that texts the on-call technician fails, twice. Later it comes back and the alert is sent.

Known Measurement Gaps

Back to lab menu ↑

What we don't measure yet. Responsible evaluation means distinguishing measured results from assumptions. These are signals NightAgent cannot currently verify reliably and areas where better instrumentation is still needed.

Engineering question: What don't we know?

Results are read from ElevenLabs. Tools aren't really called during an agent test, so tests never put tickets or messages on the live board. A reply check is judged by an AI grader against a written pass condition; a tool check compares the exact tool and values the agent chose.

Next: Test Inspector

Back to lab menu ↑

The next Evaluation Lab feature will go beyond PASS or FAIL and make an individual test explainable: expected behavior, actual behavior, conversation context, tool choices, evaluator decisions, and any timing or execution data NightAgent can reliably capture.

Engineering question: Why did this test pass or fail?

This section is intentionally labeled planned. No telemetry or execution details will be presented as measured until NightAgent actually captures them.