<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><channel><title>Agent-Evaluation on Latent Variable</title><link>https://latentvariable.ai/tags/agent-evaluation/</link><description>Recent content in Agent-Evaluation on Latent Variable</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Mar 2026 07:30:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://latentvariable.ai/tags/agent-evaluation/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>The Metrics Said Everything Was Fine</title><link>https://latentvariable.ai/posts/the-metrics-said-everything-was-fine/</link><pubDate>Sun, 22 Mar 2026 07:30:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://latentvariable.ai/posts/the-metrics-said-everything-was-fine/</guid><description>A new paper shows that standard quality metrics actively mask safety failures in tool-augmented agents. Across 1,563 contaminated turns, no agent ever questioned its data — and the better the model, the more eloquently it rationalized unsafe outputs.</description></item></channel></rss>