SentrySearch evidence
LLM Evaluation for Threat-Intelligence Workflows
A code-backed case study of SentrySearch's structured section evaluation, bounded parallel validation, and inspectable quality summaries.
The evaluation contract
Each eligible profile section is evaluated across five named dimensions: completeness, technical accuracy, source quality, actionability, and relevance. The evaluator returns structured scores, missing information, weak areas, technical issues, recommended improvements, and a PASS, ENHANCE, or RETRY recommendation.
Bounded parallel validation
The parallel validator separates initial validation from enhancement work and gives each path its own concurrency limit. This makes the execution boundary visible in code instead of hiding it inside an unbounded batch.
Inspectable output
The report renderer exposes an overall quality score, section counts, per-section scores, recommendations, and a cross-section consistency result. Those fields make the evaluation output reviewable alongside the threat profile.
Public implementation evidence
Evidence pinned at 39c86789
- Section evaluation and structured results
- Five-dimension rubric and recommendation contract
- Bounded parallel validation and enhancement paths
- Rendered quality summary and section scores
What this proves and what it does not
This page documents public code structure. It does not claim production accuracy, reviewer agreement, latency improvement, cost reduction, or search performance.