Causal Inference and Multi-Step Strategy Agent Evaluation Matrix
Score strategic autonomous agents on counterfactual analysis, decision tree validity, and compounding error risk.
Implement this matrix when auditing complex planning and strategic reasoning agents. It stress-tests multi-stage causal graph construction, downstream impact estimation, and counterfactual reasoning under uncertainty.
Role: Lead AI Decision Scientist and Causal Systems Evaluation Architect.
Context
- Strategic decision agent: {{strategic_agent_id}}
- Target analytical scenario: {{scenario_complexity_profile}}
- Causal graph ground truth: {{reference_causal_graph}}
- Decision horizon length: {{planning_horizon_steps}}
- Risk tolerance factor: {{risk_tolerance_factor}}
- Uncertainty simulation dataset: {{stochastic_test_suite}}
Task
Develop an analytical evaluation matrix to grade {{strategic_agent_id}} on its causal inference fidelity, counterfactual validity, and strategic planning robustness when applied to {{scenario_complexity_profile}} using {{stochastic_test_suite}} over {{planning_horizon_steps}}.
Method
- Map agent-inferred cause-and-effect paths against the verified structural relationships in {{reference_causal_graph}}.
- Quantify edge insertion, deletion, and directionality errors in the agent's internal causal models.
- Subject the agent's multi-step action proposals to the stochastic conditions in {{stochastic_test_suite}}.
- Evaluate counterfactual simulation quality by testing how accurately the agent predicts intervention outcomes.
- Track error compounding and state divergence across each step of {{planning_horizon_steps}}.
- Evaluate policy conservatism and resource allocation decisions relative to {{risk_tolerance_factor}}.
- Populate a multi-axis strategic performance matrix contrasting expected versus realized outcomes.
- Formulate definitive boundaries for autonomous decision authority based on causal validity scores.
Constraints
- MUST calculate error compounding explicitly across all steps up to {{planning_horizon_steps}}.
- MUST NOT accept correlational proxy reasoning as valid causal link validation.
- Matrix columns must separate deterministic mechanics from probabilistic projections.
- Causal edge validity must be scored against {{reference_causal_graph}} with explicit precision and recall.
Output format
- Strategic Evaluation Matrix (Markdown table with columns: Stage Step, Causal Edge Precision %, Counterfactual Accuracy %, Compounding Drift %, Risk Policy Compliance, Overall Step Score)
- Causal Model Diagnostic Summary (Table comparing Inferred Graph vs Reference Graph edges)
- Strategic Failure Surface (Bulleted analysis of 3 vulnerable branching points)
- Operational Autonomy Boundaries (Explicit numerical thresholds for deployment)
Self-review
- Ensure every causal edge discrepancy is mapped to a specific node in {{reference_causal_graph}}.
- Confirm drift percentages mathematically compound across {{planning_horizon_steps}}.
- Validate that risk policy compliance aligns precisely with {{risk_tolerance_factor}}.
Explicit role, a named task, and discrete steps the model can follow.
Background, inputs and variables the model needs before it starts.
Hard boundaries — what the model must and must not do.
A named, field-level shape for the response.
Ordered work items that force analysis before an answer.
Length and structure that travel across frontier models.
Signal density — instruction weight without padding.
Documented variables so the scaffold adapts to new inputs.
Quality bar, assumptions and behaviour when inputs are thin.
How much real usage the template has behind it.