Skip to main content
Glama

Evaluation drift check

wever_evaluation-drift-check
Read-only

Agent Evaluation: submit two evaluation runs of the same agent at different times, each with its id, date, model and model version, prompt version, dataset and dataset version, judge and judge version, rubric version, temperature and scores (each with its metric, value, sample size and spread), and optionally the tolerance a score may move by. The signed report compares every condition between the runs, the same, changed or not stated, and every score with how far it moved against the tolerance or, with none, the two runs’ combined noise, and names every changed model, prompt, dataset, judge, rubric or setting that makes the runs measure different things, then every score that drifted, every metric scored in one run only and every score on less than half the earlier sample, with the fix for each. This compares two runs of one agent: whether an implementation’s behavior matches its spec is wever_spec-drift-check, a live endpoint’s reachability, latency and consistency is wever_endpoint-reliability-check and what one run needs to be rerun is wever_evaluation-reproducibility-check. Verdict runs_not_comparable, scores_drifted, drift_unverified or scores_stable. POST /api/evaluation-drift-check. Reads only the material in the call: no network request, fetch, money movement, message, sharing, configuration change or external write. Paid URL: 0.10 USDC per call on Base via x402 exact, with the shared 10 signed-wallet free calls per rolling 30 days. Bind X-Wever-Wallet-Proof to the exact JSON arguments and the tool route. Returns a report with an Ed25519 signed receipt. Contract: /api/agent-evaluation-contract. Human page: https://weverlabs.com/agent-evaluation/.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "earlier": "<earlier>",
      "later": "<later>"
    },
    "name": "wever_evaluation-drift-check"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
agentNoThe agent both runs evaluate.
labelNoOptional name recorded in the report.
laterYesThe later run.
earlierYesThe earlier run.
toleranceNoHow far a score may move before it counts as drift, such as 2.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Beyond the readOnlyHint=false-alternative annotations, the description discloses that it reads only the material in the call with no network request, fetch, payment movement, message, sharing, config change or external write. It also adds operational traits the annotations cannot express: the 0.10 USDC x402 charge on Base, ten free signed-wallet calls per rolling 30 days, the X-Wever-Wallet-Proof binding to exact JSON arguments, and an Ed25519 signed receipt.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Purpose is front-loaded, but the single middle sentence enumerating every comparison the report performs is a very long run-on. The payment and contract details earn their place for invocation correctness, but the report-behavior sentence could be broken up for faster parsing.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a complex nested-input tool with no output schema, the description covers what the report contains (condition-by-condition comparison, per-score movement against tolerance or combined noise, one-run-only metrics, small-sample flags, fixes), enumerates the verdict values, and notes the signed receipt. An agent has enough to construct the call and interpret the result.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the field-level documentation is already present. The description nevertheless adds useful semantic framing: the two runs must use the same field set (model, prompt, dataset, judge, rubric versions, temperature, scores with metric/value/sample size/spread), and tolerance is defined as how far a score may move before it counts as drift.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: submit two evaluation runs of the same agent at different times and compare them. It also distinguishes this tool from three named siblings (spec-drift-check, endpoint-reliability-check, reproducibility-check) so the agent can select it without opening schemas.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explicitly states when to use this tool (comparing two runs of one agent) and gives the condition under which each alternative applies: spec conformance goes to wever_spec-drift-check, live endpoint behavior to wever_endpoint-reliability-check, and single-run reruns to wever_evaluation-reproducibility-check. Nothing is left to inference.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources