Context inventory
Core platform
Coverage Engineering
Benchmark coverage by design—not by whatever data happened to be available.
Turn requirements, internal materials, existing cases, and domain context into an explicit model of what your benchmark must represent. Agents propose the structure; your AI team steers it; specialists validate where judgment matters.

Why it exists
More cases do not fix an accidental benchmark.
Most evaluation sets inherit the distribution and blind spots of historical data, ad hoc examples, or generic suites. They can grow in volume without answering whether critical behaviors, exceptions, and domain conditions are represented. Coverage Engineering makes benchmark scope a designed artifact: explicit enough to inspect, challenge, update, and use to direct the next expert or generation effort.
Coverage model
Construction patterns
How it works
A controlled path from internal context to development evidence.
Gather the operating context
Bring requirements, internal materials, current cases, failure reports, and domain constraints into one inspectable source set.
Context inventory
Model the coverage space
Structure the behavior as dimensions, topics, applicability conditions, risk levels, and important intersections.
Coverage model
Design case construction
Agents propose Case Construction Patterns for representative situations, difficult combinations, and known edge conditions.
Construction patterns
Review gaps and ratify scope
AI teams steer the benchmark shape while domain specialists validate the distinctions that materially affect correctness.
Approved coverage plan
Durable outputs
Not another disconnected dashboard. A reusable correctness asset.
Coverage map
An explicit model of the situations, behaviors, contexts, and risks the benchmark is intended to represent.
Requirement trace
A visible connection between source requirements and the dimensions, topics, and cases created to test them.
Case Construction Patterns
Reusable instructions for creating cases with the right context, variation, constraints, and expected evidence.
Prioritized gap queue
A continuously maintained view of missing intersections and the expert or data contribution needed to close each one.
Division of work
Agents scale preparation. People retain judgment and control.
AI engineering team
Defines system boundaries, intended behavior, available evidence, and the development decisions the benchmark must support.
A defensible benchmark scope that can be carried into evaluation and iteration.
Domain specialists
Validate which distinctions, exceptions, failure modes, and contextual signals are meaningful in real work.
Targeted review of consequential gaps instead of open-ended annotation.
Teammately agents
Parse materials, propose the coverage structure, find sparse intersections, and prepare focused review questions.
More benchmark design completed before scarce experts need to engage.
Decisions it supports
Questions your team should be able to answer with evidence.
Does the benchmark represent the work that matters?
Trace required behaviors to concrete coverage instead of assuming historical data is representative.
Which important intersections are still absent?
Find gaps across context, user type, task, risk, channel, or any domain-specific dimension.
Where is expert input actually required?
Route specialists only the gaps whose meaning cannot be resolved from existing materials or prior decisions.
What changes when the product or policy changes?
Update affected parts of the coverage map while keeping the benchmark’s intent inspectable.
Connected infrastructure
Carry the work forward instead of starting over at every stage.
Know what your benchmark represents—and what it still misses.
Bring one consequential behavior, one expert group, and the development evidence you already have. We’ll help map the correctness workflow around them.