The theory before the workshop. What these things actually are, why the first one people build almost always gets abandoned, and how to pick the right kind for the work in front of you.
Each one only makes sense once the previous one is answered.
That is a demo. It tells you the tool can work. It does not tell you how often it does.
Two tools, one line between them. Most confusion about evals is someone reaching for the wrong side of it.
Answer that and the kind of eval is already decided. Get it wrong and you will spend a week building the wrong instrument.
Use the cheapest one that can express what you mean. Reaching for the expensive one first is the most common mistake.
Whatever the kind, whatever the domain. If one of these is missing you do not have an eval, you have a spreadsheet.
Nobody needs to know they are at 73%. What they need is to know whether yesterday's change helped.
People build one, get a bad number, conclude the tool cannot do the job, and stop. The number was usually measuring the wrong thing.
The cost falls the opposite way round to what most people assume, and getting it wrong is how these die in month two.
You now have the map. The next two sessions are the two halves of it, built by hand.
Write down what counts as correct. Freeze a small set of cases. Score them the cheapest way that expresses what you mean. Then change a rule and watch the number.
tutto.one/praxis · daniel@tutto.one