AgentStripes: An Evidence-Graded Maturity Model for AI Agents
Nutan Kumar Naik, Vijay Prasad Poudel, Aditya Kumar Saroj, Saurav Samantray, Abhishek Patel
Abstract
Benchmarks report what an Artificial Intelligence (AI) agent can do on a task suite, but not whether one released version has been engineered with the controls that make it reliable, safe and observable, or how strongly that is shown. This paper proposes AgentStripes, an evidence-graded maturity model for AI agents. It defines levels (0 to 7 stripes), process areas (12 areas holding 40 capabilities), three gates (basic, safety, proof) that hold an agent at a level however high its score, and evidence grades E0 to E5. Each applicable capability receives a rating from 0 to 3 and a separate evidence level; these are combined into a credit, aggregated into a severity-weighted score and converted into stripes that the gates limit. Instruments gather evidence, language-model judges interpret it under explicit criteria, and the arithmetic is deterministic. The model is compared with standards at topic level without a claim of conformance, and an unexecuted validation protocol is specified. An empirical evaluation (exploratory, non-confirmatory) of 30 public Python agent repositories, with static evidence only, is a demonstration and not a validation: static evidence caps every final stripe at 2, 26 repositories end at one stripe and 4 at two, and this distinction is unreliable, since re-judging changed the final stripe of 4 of 22 repositories (engine, dossier and panel changed), whereas none of 8 panel-only repeats, all at stripe 1, changed. The parameters are expert conventions without outcome based calibration, and the stripes have not been shown to predict reliability or safety.
Create a lesson
Related papers
LLM-Based Policy Compliance Verification of Loan Applications
Florentina Voboril
Maximising Transparency in Context Compaction Improves Retention of Facts and Commitments for Lightweight Coding Agents
Felix Woolford
EvalBuilder: Can LLMs Build Efficient Benchmarks?
Huaisheng Zhu, Hangfan Zhang, Teng Xiao et al.
Designing Textual Interfaces To Enhance Llm Reasoning On Audio-Visual Question Answering
Yi Wang, Tianzi Wang, Tong Lei et al.
Beyond Correctness: Compute-Responsive Data Selection for Reasoning Model Post-Training
Liang He, Xiangyu Li, Yuxin Wang et al.
Memorizing Who, Knowing How: Benchmarking Personal and Procedural Memory for Persistent Assistants
Maosheng Qin, Qi Zhang, Mingxuan Xia et al.