Fidelity

Layer: Agent (behavioral assessment)
Scale: 0-100 with Low/Moderate/High/Critical/Extreme risk bands
Production Tier: Transaction-Grade + Monitoring

Purpose

Fidelity determines whether an agent's observed behavior is reliable enough for trusted operation. It translates behavior quality and risk signals into a single decision-ready trust score.

How It Works

1Capture runtime behavior signals

→

2Aggregate performance evidence

→

3Fidelity evaluation

→

4Operational policy decision

→

5Continuous feedback and retraining triggers

Emits

score (0-100)confidence (0-1)risk levelrecommended action

Scoring Dimensions

1. Behavioral Consistency

Assesses stability and predictability of behavior patterns across contexts.

2. Contract Fulfillment

Assesses completion quality and reliability for committed outcomes.

3. Reputation Quality

Assesses trusted counterparty feedback quality and breadth.

4. Anomaly Freedom

Assesses abnormal behavior incidence and severity trends.

Public note: exact formulas, weights, and calibration constants are intentionally withheld.

Input Schema

Field	Type	Required	Description
entity_id	string	yes	Agent identifier.
behavior_events	object[]	yes	Behavioral telemetry and outcomes.
commitment_outcomes	object[]	yes	Task/contract completion evidence.
reputation_signals	object[]	no	Counterparty feedback and trust metadata.
anomaly_events	object[]	no	Detected anomalies and severity labels.
evaluation_window	object	yes	Time window and cohort scope.

Output Schema

Field	Type	Description
framework	string	fidelity
version	string	Scoring specification version.
entity_id	string	Evaluated agent identifier.
score	number	Fidelity score from 0 to 100.
risk_band	string	Behavioral risk classification.
confidence	number	Confidence in score quality (0 to 1).
drivers	string[]	Main contributors to current score state.
recommended_action	string	Suggested response (monitor, review, restrict).

Score Interpretation

Fidelity Tiering Bar

Behavioral risk posture by score range for runtime trust decisions.

80-100

Low Risk

Interpretation: Behavior is consistently reliable.

Typical action: Standard monitoring.

60-79

Moderate Risk

Interpretation: Generally reliable with manageable weaknesses.

Typical action: Monitor key weaknesses.

40-59

High Risk

Interpretation: Material reliability concerns requiring intervention.

Typical action: Restrict sensitive tasks.

20-39

Critical Risk

Interpretation: Severe behavior reliability risk.

Typical action: Contain and review.

0-19

Extreme Risk

Interpretation: Trust is insufficient for continued operation.

Typical action: Immediate containment.

Worked Example

Scenario: a platform compares three agents handling enterprise support workflows.

Operational outcome:

1. Agent A is retained for high-volume critical workloads.
2. Agent B remains active with expanded monitoring requirements.
3. Agent C is moved to limited-scope tasks pending improvements.

Illustrative note: values and scores above are example outputs for documentation only.

Use Cases

AI Service Reliability Qualification

Score internal and external agents before assigning customer-facing workloads with strict service-level expectations.

Marketplace Vendor Ranking

Rank agent providers by observed behavior quality to improve procurement choices and reduce operational surprises.

Regulated Process Automation

Evaluate reliability for agents participating in compliance-sensitive workflows where error patterns create legal or financial exposure.

Continuous Performance Governance

Monitor production behavior drift over time and trigger controls when reliability degrades.