Skip to content
NEWWoodfrog joins the Claude Partner Network at launch.
Trust & safety

AI evaluation. Before you ship.

We do not put probabilistic systems into production on faith. We build the eval suites, run the red-team protocols, and track regressions, so you launch on evidence, not on a good demo.

What we measure

Six things we prove before launch.

01

Eval suites built for your task

A graded test set for the exact job the model does for you, accuracy, faithfulness, format, refusals, tone. Every change is scored against it, so "it feels better" becomes a number.

02

Red-team protocols

We attack the system the way a motivated user or attacker would: jailbreaks, prompt injection, data exfiltration, unsafe tool calls. Findings come with severity and a fix, not just a scary screenshot.

03

Regression tracking

Models, prompts and data drift. We track every release against the baseline so a quiet regression on edge cases is caught before your users find it.

04

Hallucination + faithfulness scoring

For RAG and agent systems we measure whether answers are grounded in the evidence, and flag the ones that are confidently wrong.

05

Safety + policy checks

Toxicity, bias, PII leakage and policy violations measured on every candidate build, wired into CI so an unsafe model cannot ship by accident.

06

Model + prompt selection

Sonnet, Opus, Haiku or a fine-tune, decided on evidence per workload, not on hype. We show you the accuracy-cost-latency tradeoff with real numbers.

How it works

From “it feels better” to a number.

1
Week 1

Define what "good" means

We turn your task into measurable criteria and build the graded eval set with your domain experts.

2
Weeks 2-3

Build the harness

Automated eval suite + red-team battery, wired to run on every model, prompt or data change.

3
Week 4

Baseline + report

A scored baseline across candidates, the failure modes that matter, and a clear ship / do-not-ship call.

4
Ongoing

Guard the release

Evals run in CI. Regressions block the deploy. You ship probabilistic systems with the same confidence as code.

What you get

Evidence you can defend.

Not a slide that says “tested.” A harness you own, a baseline you can point to, and a release gate that holds the line on every future change.

A reusable, versioned eval suite you own
Red-team report with severity-ranked findings and fixes
A scored baseline across candidate models and prompts
CI integration that blocks unsafe or regressed builds
Accuracy / cost / latency tradeoff for model selection
A go-live readiness call you can defend to a board or a regulator
Straight answers

The questions you're actually asking.

How is this different from AI governance?+

Evaluation is the measurement: does this system actually work and is it safe, proven before launch. Governance is the standing program around it: policy, oversight, audit, lifecycle. Many customers do both, evaluation first.

Do you only evaluate models built on Claude?+

No. We evaluate any LLM or ML system, including OpenAI, open-weight models and your own fine-tunes. We are an Anthropic Build Partner, so we know Claude deeply, but the eval harness is model-agnostic.

We already have a model in production. Can you still help?+

Yes. We baseline what you have, surface the failure modes, and put a regression and red-team net under it so the next change does not break it quietly.

What do you need from us?+

The task definition, a few domain experts to help grade, and access to the system or its API. We build the rest.

Don't ship AI on faith.

Book a 30-minute call. We'll scope the eval that proves your system works, and tell you straight where it's most likely to break.

Talk to us