Why evals matter more than prompts: a lawyer's case against non-deterministic legal AI
HamelHusain · x · 2026-10-21
Lawyer @lexnode argues legal documents tolerate zero non-determinism: models ignore skills no matter how carefully written, so he'd take a rigid docgen template with an AI that only fills variables over generalized legal AI. @renegadesilicon builds on this to argue evals matter more than prompt or engineering skills: instruction-following is measurable, skill "hard prohibitions" can become automated checks, code-based evals catch flaws deterministically and LLM-as-judge handles semantic ones. The post also points to Hamel Husain and shreya's evals course as a starting point.
Related event: Lawyer Slams AI Legal Drafting for Ignoring Constraints, Prefers Templates(2 posts)→
More from coding & agent
- Testing Hermes Agent with n8n: Letting Agents Execute Real Automation Workflows — techlatest_net · 2026-10-23
- OpenAI: Keep MCP Server Instructions Under ~1,000 Characters or ChatGPT May Truncate Them — bibryam · 2026-10-23
- Only ~56% of MCP Servers Provide Instructions, OpenAI Data Shows — bibryam · 2026-10-23
- OpenAI: Don't Hide MCP Tools Behind listCommand/executeCommand Dispatchers — bibryam · 2026-10-23
- Resend logs 1M monthly MCP calls as OpenAI frames MCP as a distribution channel — bibryam · 2026-10-23
- MCP Elicitation lands in Claude: servers can ask users questions mid-action — bibryam · 2026-10-23