BoringEvalsYour team’s time is too valuable
for work agents can handle.
People coordinate
With BoringEvals
Keep coordination moving.
Today, people prioritize quality signals, gather eval and production evidence, and coordinate owners around development and review.
BoringEvals agents do that supporting work in your custom workflows. Your team keeps building and reviewing, with context and updates ready.
Architecture
Click a sectionDetail · detail
Click a section on the left
to see it in detail.Choose a section above
to see its detail.
A workflow engine around your existing pipeline
BoringEvals connects to your existing development pipeline: developers and coding agents, pull requests, CI and live production. Your developers and coding agents own product code. The engine supplies evidence and runs agent-assisted workflows around that work.
Coding agents
Ask why a check failed from Codex, Claude Code, Cursor or your own harness. MCP returns the finding, report and exact evidence from retained analysis. Developers and their coding agents make code changes in their existing tools.
CI
Your existing CI supplies eval runs and paired comparisons. The engine analyzes suite health and runs the workflows you configure. Metric checks and required human reviews return a pass or hold result to the existing CI check.
Production
A production issue and its traces become evidence for an agent-assisted workflow. Agents prepare a proposed regression eval case. Your team reviews and validates it before it joins the existing suite and runs in CI.
Your workflow
Compose a custom workflow from traces, eval runs or PRs; filtering and sampling; agent tasks and tools; human reviews; conditions and gates; and reports, metrics or other outputs. Add, repeat, reorder or omit blocks and branches. Choose your own owners and approval conditions. Agents prepare evidence, investigate and coordinate. People make required review decisions.
Example: investigate complaints
A production trace shows a tool timeout followed by a reply claiming success. An agent groups related failures, examines the evidence and asks targeted questions of Engineering, the Model owner and the Service owner. It collects replies and follows up on gaps. The resulting case retains evidence, ownership and decisions. Incident context is reused for release work only when the PR is linked.
Example: unblock a release
A PR and its baseline/current eval runs have a blocked required check. An agent explains the blocker and retrieves missing evidence for the required reviewers. Owners approve, block or ask for more evidence. Configured metric checks and required reviews determine pass or hold in existing CI. The agent does not approve the release or propose product-code fixes.
MCP evidence
Your coding agent can query findings, analysis, reports and exact evidence over MCP. It retrieves the relevant trace, run comparison or diff instead of repeating the investigation. Claude Code, Codex and other coding agents remain in your existing development workflow.
Eval health and analysis
The engine monitors existing CI runs, comparing results and finding dead, flaky, duplicate or gamed tests. The findings are available to custom workflows and MCP queries. These capabilities, the MCP server and workflow execution are parts of one BoringEvals engine.
The two worked examples illustrate workflows built from the same reusable blocks. They are not a fixed catalog. State, retries, ownership and decision history are retained while the agent models and methods behind your workflows evolve.
Workflow outcomes
36–58% fewer input tokens
Internal batch medians.
Catch release regressions
Statistical checks against your baseline.
Catch weak evals
Flag flaky, duplicate and gamed tests.