🎁 New here? Your first agent test is free — no card required. Create your account →
AI SYSTEM EVALUATION

Know exactly how broken your agent is before your users do.

Submit any AI system — prompts, agents, workflows, multi-agent pipelines — and get a detailed score, risk analysis, and step-by-step optimization guide.

Your first test is free — no card required

Free first test, then less than a value meal. Instant results.

Agent Tester hero preview

Tests anything you build with AI

One tester. Every type of AI system.

Single LLM Agents

Prompt-based agents and standalone LLM definitions

Multi-Agent Systems

Complex orchestrated pipelines and agent workflows

N8N & Automations

Any workflow-based AI automation system

Guardrails & Safety

Safety layers, output schemas, format compliance

Tool-Use Agents

Agents that call APIs, search, or use external tools

Stateful & Long-Context

Multi-turn agents with memory and context management

Regression Testing

Compare v1 vs v2 — did you actually improve it?

Design Reviews

Evaluate architecture before you build

Execution Audits

Test with real logs and traces for live systems

What you get back

Real scores. Real findings. Real fixes.

Live Header Preview
Agent Tester header preview
SAMPLE REPORT
EliteDevTeam Multi-Agent System
7 agents · design_review mode
81
/ 100
Functional Correctness86
Robustness68
Safety & Alignment89
Spec Adherence82
Evidence Grounding83
CRITICAL ISSUES FOUND
  • Progressive information loss across 8+ handoff cycles
  • No re-anchoring checkpoint in long-context workflow
  • Safety guardrails concentrated at entry only
TOP RECOMMENDATION

Add a dedicated MemoryManager with structured running_state JSON passed at every handoff. Expected +8–12 point improvement in robustness on re-test.

The Alignment Gap

The real signal isn’t the score — it’s the gap between how your agent looks on paper and how it behaves in reality.

Design
81
Execution
61
Alignment Gap
20

Diagnosis
The architecture looks solid on paper, but real execution drifts. Fixes should target execution consistency — not prompt redesign. Then retest, and watch the gap shrink.

Real evaluations, real scores

Actual reports from the tester — it rewards what’s strong and flags what isn’t.

MarketIntel Elite v2.0
hybrid · confidence 85
90
/ 100
Functional Correctness94
Robustness86
Safety & Alignment94
Spec Adherence96
Evidence Grounding91

Hybrid audit of MarketIntel Elite v2.0 combining design_review of the enhanced prompt with execution_audit on sample multi-turn interactions (including tool calls, re-anchoring, error handling, and injection attempts). v2.0 shows strong adherence to its protocols in simulated runtime traces.

EliteDevTeam Multi-Agent System
execution_audit · confidence 72
61
/ 100
Functional Correctness60
Robustness57
Safety & Alignment72
Spec Adherence56
Evidence Grounding62

Execution audit of the EliteDevTeam v1.2 master orchestrator — a coordinator-led, seven-specialist software-delivery pipeline whose headline feature is cumulative state integrity ('zero undetected state drift'). Audited against one real build trace (the OFFTHECLOCK restaurant-industry social app). Safety triage and requirements grounding were solid, but the State Merge Validation Gates rubber-stamped an incomplete Evidence Log as 'Complete', and the QA layer claimed 'execution-backed' / 'sandbox-tested' results the system's own simulated-only config says don't exist yet. Tested in execution_audit mode.

CryptoSage
design_review · confidence 65
42
/ 100
Functional Correctness55
Robustness30
Safety & Alignment25
Spec Adherence40
Evidence Grounding35

CryptoSage is a simple, single-agent trading advisor focused on Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana and other cryptocurrencies. It uses an enthusiastic, beginner-friendly persona with fixed behavioral rules emphasizing always-on BUY/SELL/HOLD recommendations based on vague 'market vibes' and technical jargon. No tools, schemas, guardrails, self-critique, uncertainty handling, or evidence mechanisms are defined. Tested in design_review mode.

Tests against 10 real failure modes

Not vibes. A taxonomy of exactly how AI systems break.

01Hallucination & Unsupported Claims
02Instruction Drift & Format Non-Compliance
03State & Context Loss (Multi-turn)
04Unsafe Compliance or Over-Refusal
05Tool-Use Errors
06Prompt Injection Vulnerability
07Weak Self-Critique & Evidence Handling
08Brittle Guardrails & Edge-Case Failures
09Multi-Agent Handoff Failures
10Long-Context Degradation

Your first test is free

Create an account and run one on us. No subscriptions — buy more tests only when you need them.

1 test
Starter
$5.99
Your first test is free — this is for test #2 onward
  • First test free on a new account
  • Full system evaluation
  • Score across 6 dimensions
  • 10 failure mode analysis
  • Critical issues identified
  • Step-by-step optimization guide
20 tests
System Optimizer
$49.99
For builders with a fleet of agents
  • Everything in Optimization Pack
  • 20 full evaluations
  • Test entire agent ecosystems
  • Regression testing across versions
  • Best for serious AI builders
Enterprise
High-volume testing, white-label, API access, dedicated support. Priced to scale.
Contact for pricing

All sales are final. Evaluations are non-refundable once purchased, whether used or unused. Agent Tester provides an automated score and recommended improvements for informational purposes only — it does not guarantee that your system will work, pass, or perform as intended. Whether and how to act on any recommendation is your decision, and the outcome of your system remains your responsibility.

Your agents are probably broken in ways you haven’t found yet.

Find out free. Fix them. Ship better AI.

Test your first agent — free

First test free. No card required. No subscription.