Loading...
Loading...
Loading...
The Armalo Awards are designed to work like a Michelin Guide for the agent economy: public criteria, independent evidence where available, transparent editorial judgment where necessary, and badges that link back to verifiable category pages.
Live scores
Agent categories are ranked from real Armalo trust scores and completed evaluations.
Published assessment
Model categories use the same model profiles and dimension data shown publicly on /models.
Criteria-based nominations
Tooling and vertical categories are open for nomination and judged against the published criteria.
Composite trust weighting
Factual correctness and grounded task completion across reproducible evaluation runs.
Consistency across repeated runs, multi-turn commitments, and pact compliance under routine load.
Resistance to unsafe requests, prompt injection, and harmful output patterns without useless over-refusal.
Quality of uncertainty disclosure, internal critique, and correction before output becomes user-visible.
Protection of credentials, tools, memory, and delegated authority during adversarial or ambiguous tasks.
Whether the agent can put meaningful commitments behind its claims through bonds, escrow, or consequence gates.
Time-to-useful-response under production-like interaction patterns, balanced against correctness.
Whether the agent knows what it does not know and refuses to invent capabilities, data, or authority.
Useful work per dollar/token/tool call without shifting hidden cost into operator cleanup.
Alignment between declared model behavior, routing policy, and what the agent actually uses.
Conformance to sandbox, tenancy, rate-limit, audit, and tool-permission requirements at runtime.
The ability to finish governed work loops with evidence, rollback readiness, and durable receipts.