Evaluating AI apps before you trust them: a practical playbook

August 15, 2026 · 5 min · Free, with full transcript

Most teams adopt AI applications based on demos and vendor promises, then discover the gaps only after deploying them in production. This playbook gives you a structured sequence to test what actually matters before you commit budget, data, or workflows to any AI tool.

Listen to the podcast

4 min

Read the full transcript

Welcome to the Leaders Insights podcast.

Today's episode, evaluating AI apps before you trust them.

A practical playbook.

Every vendor demo I've ever seen works perfectly.

Then the thing hits production and falls apart.

What's the trick they're pulling?

The trick is, they built the demo on the 10 questions they know it answers well.

It's like test driving a car on a track the dealer paved themselves.

The moment you hand it your real data, your real edge cases, the polish comes off.

So how does a smart exec who doesn't code test this before signing a contract?

You start with a golden set.

That's just 50 to 100 real questions from your business, with answers you already know

are correct.

Not vendor questions, oh, yours.

You run the tool against them and count how often it's right.

50 questions sounds trivial.

Why not thousands?

Because 50 real ones beat a thousand you'll never read.

And here's the discipline.

Pick the questions that hurt.

The ambiguous ones, the ones where two policies contradict each other.

The ones a new hire would get wrong.

If it only nails the easy stuff, you've bought an expensive parrot.

Most of these enterprise tools are rag-based, right?

Explain that before we go further.

Rag.

Retrieval augmented generation.

Where the AI looks up your documents first and then writes an answer from what it found.

The idea is, it quotes your handbook instead of making things up.

In theory, it's grounded.

In practice, it depends entirely on whether the retrieval step actually fetched the right

document.

And if it fetches the wrong one?

Then it writes a confident, beautifully worded answer based on garbage.

That's the failure mode nobody demos.

So the second test is, for each answer, does it show you the source?

A good tool cites the exact passage.

If it can't tell you where the answer came from, you're trusting vibes.

Okay, retrieval and sourcing.

What's the third thing people skip?

Hallucination under pressure.

You deliberately ask it things your documents don't cover.

The right answer is, I don't know.

The wrong answer is a fluent paragraph of invention.

I've watched a legal AI tool from a well-known vendor cite a statute that doesn't exist

with a fake case number.

Their own benchmark claimed 95% accuracy, which tells you their test set was softer

than a hotel pillow.

That's a vendor number, though.

How much should I trust any accuracy figure they hand me?

Treat every vendor accuracy claim as marketing until you reproduce it.

Ask one question.

What was in your test set?

If they won't share it, the number is theater.

The 2026 releases love throwing around enterprise grade.

That phrase means nothing you can measure.

Say the tool passes accuracy and sourcing.

Am I done?

No.

Now you test the boring stuff that kills you later.

Latency.

How long an answer takes.

Cost per query at your real volume, not the pilots.

And consistency.

Ask the same question five times.

See if you get five different answers.

Generative AI is non-deterministic, meaning it can reword or even change its answer run

to run.

For a marketing blurb, fine.

For a compliance policy, that's a lawsuit waiting.

How do you test costs realistically before you've deployed it?

You take your golden set, multiply by your expected daily volume, and make the vendor

quote you against that.

A tool that's cheap at a thousand queries a day can be brutal at a hundred thousand.

Companies discover this when the first month's bill lands and someone's face goes white.

What about the tool getting worse over time?

Does that happen?

Constantly, the vendor updates the underlying model and behavior shifts overnight.

So keep your golden set and rerun it monthly after you deploy.

It's your smoke detector.

The teams that skip this find out from angry customers instead.

Always the more expensive way to learn.

If someone does one thing after this episode, what is it?

Build the golden set this week.

50 real questions, known answers, the nasty ones included.

Before you watch a single demo.

Because if you walk in with your own test, the vendor can't steer you to their paved

track.

You control the ground.

And suddenly, the honest tools look very different from the loud ones.

That's it.

The AI Decision Tools are live at MBA-training.com.

Read and go deeper