Obsidian Metadata
| type | concept |
| sources | Source - Demystifying Evals for AI Agents, Source - AI Evals FAQ |
Capability vs Regression Evals
| Capability (“quality”) evals | Regression evals | |
|---|---|---|
| Question | ”What can this agent do well?" | "Does it still handle everything it used to?” |
| Expected pass rate | Low at first: a hill to climb | ~100%: a drop means something broke |
| Built from | Tasks the agent struggles with | Tasks the agent reliably solves |
- Capability evals that reach high pass rates “graduate” into the regression suite, run continuously to catch drift. “Can we do this at all?” becomes “Can we still do this reliably?”
- Run regression evals alongside capability hill-climbing so changes don’t break other things.
- This lines up with Hamel’s guidance: CI sets = regression-style (curated, cheap, deterministic); a ~70% pass rate on challenge sets is healthier than 100% (see When to Build an Automated Evaluator, Eval Maintenance and Cadence).
- Descript runs two separate suites: quality benchmarking and regression testing.
Related
CI Evals vs Production Monitoring · pass@k and pass^k · Eval-Driven Development

