Aglet

Turn Grounding Reviews Into Better Agent Evaluation

Grounding cases teach the team whether it rewards fluent detail or supported usefulness. Preserve the claim, source passage, omission or contradiction, and decision impact. Turn that lesson into a review habit that makes evidence boundaries visible without requiring every answer to be long.

Keep the lesson for the next incident

  1. Save the grounding case

    Store request, context version, retrieved passages, answer, claim map, support labels, exception, and final interpretation together. Include a case where a useful answer was brief and a plausible answer added unsupported detail.

  2. Improve grounding practice

    Add claim extraction, context provenance, contradiction, omission, and abstention checks to evaluation plans. Require a matched no-answer case. Explain how the change addresses the specific unsupported claim or retrieval gap.

  3. Watch for fluent overreach

    Set a signal such as longer answers scoring better without added support, claims lacking source links, or context conflicts hidden in one total. Assign an owner to sample claim maps and revisit the practice when the signal appears.

What to carry forward

The learning record should connect unsupported detail to the revised claim-review practice and recurrence signal. State which evidence boundary changed. Keep the lesson tied to context and request rather than treating one grounding score as general truth.

Technical background: Google DeepMind evaluation research.

Keep the decision with the work.

Use a Work Item in Aglet to record the problem, the evidence you have, and the next decision. Add an owner and priority, then keep updates in the discussion so the next person can follow the reasoning.

Create an account See the product workflow