AI agent guardrails vs. evals: How to build more reliable agent systems

Quoted on this wiki

Every place a page here uses this source, in the order the words come in it.

1. Two branches can attempt conflicting actions. “The agent can carry stale context into a later decision.” A valid intermediate action can produce a poor final outcome.

   In AI SDR agent context and memory

2. An eval judges behavior while a guardrail constrains behavior. Here’s an easy way to break this down: “Eval Did the agent perform well? Was the answer correct, grounded, useful, or complete?” The voice agent needed a guardrail that permitted only one active answer. An eval could detect the overlapping speech after the run, but detection alone would not prevent the behavior from recurring.

   In AI SDR agent evaluation

3. the policies governing the product; “the tools available to the agent;” the complete trajectory;

   In AI SDR agent evaluation

4. 1. What can the agent do without approval? “List the permitted actions explicitly.” 2. Which boundaries are enforced in code?

   In AI SDR agent human approval

5. stop after confirmation or transfer control to a human. “These conditions can become guardrails, eval criteria, or both.” The product manager defines the intended experience. The developer converts that intent into system behavior. The eval reveals whether the experience occurred, while the guardrail prevents actions that should never happen.

   In Operational maturity criteria