<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel>
    <title>DEV Community: Derf</title>
    <description>The latest articles on DEV Community by Derf (@derfe).</description>
    <link>https://dev.to/derfe</link>
    
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="https://dev.to/feed/derfe"/>
    <language>en</language>
    <item>
      <title>Testing AI agents before users do</title>
      <dc:creator>Derf</dc:creator>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2026 08:03:31 +0000</pubDate>
      <link>https://dev.to/derfe/testing-ai-agents-before-users-do-13jb</link>
      <guid>https://dev.to/derfe/testing-ai-agents-before-users-do-13jb</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Site: [&lt;a href="https://test.qlankr.com" rel="noopener noreferrer"&gt;https://test.qlankr.com&lt;/a&gt;]&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;A lot of AI testing still feels too dependent on gut feeling.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;You run an agent, chatbot, or RAG workflow, tweak a prompt, change a tool, try again and then ask yourself:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Did this actually get better, or does it just feel different?&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;That was the starting point for QLANKR Test.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;I built it because I wanted a faster and more structured way to test AI systems before users do.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  The problem
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;A lot of builders are shipping:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;AI agents&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;chatbots&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;RAG systems&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;tool-calling workflows&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;

&lt;p&gt;But the evaluation loop is often messy.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;It is easy to demo something.&lt;br&gt;
It is harder to inspect quality clearly, compare runs over time, and understand where a system breaks down.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  What QLANKR Test does
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;QLANKR Test lets you run an evaluation and get:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;a structured report&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;a QI score&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;clearer signals on what feels weak, inconsistent, or unreliable&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The goal is not to replace human judgment.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The goal is to make AI evaluation more structured, repeatable, and easier to inspect.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  What I wanted to improve
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The main thing I wanted to avoid was “vibe-based testing”.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;That feeling where you:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;try a few prompts&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;get a decent answer once&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;assume the system is good enough&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;then discover later that it breaks in real usage&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;

&lt;p&gt;I wanted something that helps create a better feedback loop.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  What I am still figuring out
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The big questions for me right now are:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;does the report feel genuinely useful?&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;does the score make sense?&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;what is still missing for real-world AI testing?&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;

&lt;p&gt;If you work on AI products, agents, or evaluation workflows, I would genuinely love feedback.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Site: [&lt;a href="https://test.qlankr.com" rel="noopener noreferrer"&gt;https://test.qlankr.com&lt;/a&gt;]&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
      <category>agents</category>
      <category>ai</category>
      <category>showdev</category>
      <category>testing</category>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
