mirror of
https://github.com/crewAIInc/crewAI.git
synced 2026-07-05 06:59:23 +00:00
* feat: adopt directory-based docs versioning with Edge channel Switch docs.crewai.com from navigation-only versioning (every version selector entry rendered the same docs/<lang>/* source files) to Mintlify's directory-based versioning so each version selector entry renders its own snapshot. Add an "Edge" channel under docs/edge/<lang>/* that always reflects main HEAD for unreleased work, eliminating pre-release leakage onto frozen release labels. External links to canonical /<lang>/* URLs are preserved via wildcard redirects that always land on the current default version. Layout: - docs/edge/<lang>/* rolling source (you edit here) - docs/edge/enterprise-api.*.yaml - docs/v<X.Y.Z>/<lang>/* frozen, immutable snapshots - docs/v<X.Y.Z>/enterprise-api.*.yaml - docs/images/ shared, append-only - docs/docs.json nav + redirects URLs follow the Mintlify-idiomatic shape: /edge/<lang>/<page> for Edge, /v<X.Y.Z>/<lang>/<page> for every frozen snapshot. The wildcard redirects /<lang>/:slug* -> /<default>/<lang>/:slug* keep stale links working, and every freeze rewrites them (plus all per-section/per-page redirects) so destinations always resolve to the current default without depending on a second redirect hop. Release flow integration (devtools release): - New module crewai_devtools.docs_versioning.freeze() materialises docs/v<X.Y.Z>/ from docs/edge/, rewrites openapi: refs inside the snapshot, inserts the version into every language block in docs.json, and refreshes all redirect destinations. - _update_docs_and_create_pr() in cli.py now calls that freeze during Phase 2 of devtools release. Edge changelogs are updated first (so the snapshot freeze picks them up), then the snapshot is staged alongside docs.json, branched as docs/freeze-v<X.Y.Z>, and the PR is titled [docs-freeze] docs: snapshot and changelog for v<X.Y.Z> — the title prefix the new CI guard reads. - The PR still gates tag, GitHub release, PyPI publish, and the enterprise release as before; no new PRs are added. - Pre-releases (1.X.YaN, 1.X.YbN, ...) skip the snapshot — they ride Edge — and the docs PR title omits the [docs-freeze] prefix. - docs_check (AI-generated docs scaffolding) writes to docs/edge/<lang>/* so newly-generated unreleased docs land in Edge and never accidentally touch a frozen snapshot. Migration scripts (one-shot): - scripts/docs/freeze_historical_versions.py reconstructs all 16 historical snapshots (v1.10.0 .. v1.14.7) from git tags via git archive | tar, rewriting openapi: MDX refs so each snapshot reads its own enterprise-api YAML rather than the live one. - scripts/docs/prefix_version_paths.py one-shot-migrates docs.json: rewrites every page path in 16 versioned blocks to point under docs/v<X.Y.Z>/, inserts a new Edge entry per language, tags v1.14.7 as Latest (default), prunes pages whose target file doesn't exist in the snapshot (e.g. docs/ar/ didn't exist before v1.12.0), and writes the wildcard + per-section redirects. - scripts/docs/freeze_current_edge.py is now a thin CLI wrapper around docs_versioning.freeze for manual one-off freezes (e.g. retroactively snapshotting a forgotten release). CI guards (.github/workflows/docs-snapshots.yml): - Frozen snapshots under docs/v[0-9]*/ are immutable; only PRs whose title contains [docs-freeze] (i.e. release-cut PRs generated by devtools release or the manual wrapper) may modify them. - Images under docs/images/ are append-only since snapshots share a single image directory. Deleting or renaming an image breaks every historical snapshot that still references it. Restored docs/images/crewai-otel-export.png from PR #3673; it was deleted in PR #4908 but v1.10.0 / v1.10.1 snapshots still reference it. Restoring instead of editing the snapshots preserves historical rendering fidelity and validates the new append-only rule retroactively. Tests: - lib/devtools/tests/test_docs_versioning.py covers the freeze: file copy, openapi rewrite, version insertion, default demotion, redirect upserts, per-section redirect rewriting, idempotency, and invalid inputs. Verified locally with mintlify broken-links: 0 broken links across the full site (Edge + 16 frozen versions, 4 locales). AGENTS.md (repo root) is the contributor guide for the new model; RELEASING.md is the release-cut runbook; README's Contribution section links to both. Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com> * style: resolve linter issues --------- Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
252 lines
7.9 KiB
Plaintext
252 lines
7.9 KiB
Plaintext
---
|
|
title: Hallucination Guardrail
|
|
description: "Prevent and detect AI hallucinations in your CrewAI tasks"
|
|
icon: "shield-check"
|
|
mode: "wide"
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Overview
|
|
|
|
The Hallucination Guardrail is an enterprise feature that validates AI-generated content to ensure it's grounded in facts and doesn't contain hallucinations. It analyzes task outputs against reference context and provides detailed feedback when potentially hallucinated content is detected.
|
|
|
|
## What are Hallucinations?
|
|
|
|
AI hallucinations occur when language models generate content that appears plausible but is factually incorrect or not supported by the provided context. The Hallucination Guardrail helps prevent these issues by:
|
|
|
|
- Comparing outputs against reference context
|
|
- Evaluating faithfulness to source material
|
|
- Providing detailed feedback on problematic content
|
|
- Supporting custom thresholds for validation strictness
|
|
|
|
## Basic Usage
|
|
|
|
### Setting Up the Guardrail
|
|
|
|
```python
|
|
from crewai.tasks.hallucination_guardrail import HallucinationGuardrail
|
|
from crewai import LLM
|
|
|
|
# Basic usage - will use task's expected_output as context
|
|
guardrail = HallucinationGuardrail(
|
|
llm=LLM(model="gpt-4o-mini")
|
|
)
|
|
|
|
# With explicit reference context
|
|
context_guardrail = HallucinationGuardrail(
|
|
context="AI helps with various tasks including analysis and generation.",
|
|
llm=LLM(model="gpt-4o-mini")
|
|
)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Adding to Tasks
|
|
|
|
```python
|
|
from crewai import Task
|
|
|
|
# Create your task with the guardrail
|
|
task = Task(
|
|
description="Write a summary about AI capabilities",
|
|
expected_output="A factual summary based on the provided context",
|
|
agent=my_agent,
|
|
guardrail=guardrail # Add the guardrail to validate output
|
|
)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Advanced Configuration
|
|
|
|
### Custom Threshold Validation
|
|
|
|
For stricter validation, you can set a custom faithfulness threshold (0-10 scale):
|
|
|
|
```python
|
|
# Strict guardrail requiring high faithfulness score
|
|
strict_guardrail = HallucinationGuardrail(
|
|
context="Quantum computing uses qubits that exist in superposition states.",
|
|
llm=LLM(model="gpt-4o-mini"),
|
|
threshold=8.0 # Requires score >= 8 to pass validation
|
|
)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Including Tool Response Context
|
|
|
|
When your task uses tools, you can include tool responses for more accurate validation:
|
|
|
|
```python
|
|
# Guardrail with tool response context
|
|
weather_guardrail = HallucinationGuardrail(
|
|
context="Current weather information for the requested location",
|
|
llm=LLM(model="gpt-4o-mini"),
|
|
tool_response="Weather API returned: Temperature 22°C, Humidity 65%, Clear skies"
|
|
)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## How It Works
|
|
|
|
### Validation Process
|
|
|
|
1. **Context Analysis**: The guardrail compares task output against the provided reference context
|
|
2. **Faithfulness Scoring**: Uses an internal evaluator to assign a faithfulness score (0-10)
|
|
3. **Verdict Determination**: Determines if content is faithful or contains hallucinations
|
|
4. **Threshold Checking**: If a custom threshold is set, validates against that score
|
|
5. **Feedback Generation**: Provides detailed reasons when validation fails
|
|
|
|
### Validation Logic
|
|
|
|
- **Default Mode**: Uses verdict-based validation (FAITHFUL vs HALLUCINATED)
|
|
- **Threshold Mode**: Requires faithfulness score to meet or exceed the specified threshold
|
|
- **Error Handling**: Gracefully handles evaluation errors and provides informative feedback
|
|
|
|
## Guardrail Results
|
|
|
|
The guardrail returns structured results indicating validation status:
|
|
|
|
```python
|
|
# Example of guardrail result structure
|
|
{
|
|
"valid": False,
|
|
"feedback": "Content appears to be hallucinated (score: 4.2/10, verdict: HALLUCINATED). The output contains information not supported by the provided context."
|
|
}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Result Properties
|
|
|
|
- **valid**: Boolean indicating whether the output passed validation
|
|
- **feedback**: Detailed explanation when validation fails, including:
|
|
- Faithfulness score
|
|
- Verdict classification
|
|
- Specific reasons for failure
|
|
|
|
## Integration with Task System
|
|
|
|
### Automatic Validation
|
|
|
|
When a guardrail is added to a task, it automatically validates the output before the task is marked as complete:
|
|
|
|
```python
|
|
# Task output validation flow
|
|
task_output = agent.execute_task(task)
|
|
validation_result = guardrail(task_output)
|
|
|
|
if validation_result.valid:
|
|
# Task completes successfully
|
|
return task_output
|
|
else:
|
|
# Task fails with validation feedback
|
|
raise ValidationError(validation_result.feedback)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Event Tracking
|
|
|
|
The guardrail integrates with CrewAI's event system to provide observability:
|
|
|
|
- **Validation Started**: When guardrail evaluation begins
|
|
- **Validation Completed**: When evaluation finishes with results
|
|
- **Validation Failed**: When technical errors occur during evaluation
|
|
|
|
## Best Practices
|
|
|
|
### Context Guidelines
|
|
|
|
<Steps>
|
|
<Step title="Provide Comprehensive Context">
|
|
Include all relevant factual information that the AI should base its output on:
|
|
|
|
```python
|
|
context = """
|
|
Company XYZ was founded in 2020 and specializes in renewable energy solutions.
|
|
They have 150 employees and generated $50M revenue in 2023.
|
|
Their main products include solar panels and wind turbines.
|
|
"""
|
|
```
|
|
</Step>
|
|
|
|
<Step title="Keep Context Relevant">
|
|
Only include information directly related to the task to avoid confusion:
|
|
|
|
```python
|
|
# Good: Focused context
|
|
context = "The current weather in New York is 18°C with light rain."
|
|
|
|
# Avoid: Unrelated information
|
|
context = "The weather is 18°C. The city has 8 million people. Traffic is heavy."
|
|
```
|
|
</Step>
|
|
|
|
<Step title="Update Context Regularly">
|
|
Ensure your reference context reflects current, accurate information.
|
|
</Step>
|
|
</Steps>
|
|
|
|
### Threshold Selection
|
|
|
|
<Steps>
|
|
<Step title="Start with Default Validation">
|
|
Begin without custom thresholds to understand baseline performance.
|
|
</Step>
|
|
|
|
<Step title="Adjust Based on Requirements">
|
|
- **High-stakes content**: Use threshold 8-10 for maximum accuracy
|
|
- **General content**: Use threshold 6-7 for balanced validation
|
|
- **Creative content**: Use threshold 4-5 or default verdict-based validation
|
|
</Step>
|
|
|
|
<Step title="Monitor and Iterate">
|
|
Track validation results and adjust thresholds based on false positives/negatives.
|
|
</Step>
|
|
</Steps>
|
|
|
|
## Performance Considerations
|
|
|
|
### Impact on Execution Time
|
|
|
|
- **Validation Overhead**: Each guardrail adds ~1-3 seconds per task
|
|
- **LLM Efficiency**: Choose efficient models for evaluation (e.g., gpt-4o-mini)
|
|
|
|
### Cost Optimization
|
|
|
|
- **Model Selection**: Use smaller, efficient models for guardrail evaluation
|
|
- **Context Size**: Keep reference context concise but comprehensive
|
|
- **Caching**: Consider caching validation results for repeated content
|
|
|
|
## Troubleshooting
|
|
|
|
<Accordion title="Validation Always Fails">
|
|
**Possible Causes:**
|
|
- Context is too restrictive or unrelated to task output
|
|
- Threshold is set too high for the content type
|
|
- Reference context contains outdated information
|
|
|
|
**Solutions:**
|
|
- Review and update context to match task requirements
|
|
- Lower threshold or use default verdict-based validation
|
|
- Ensure context is current and accurate
|
|
</Accordion>
|
|
|
|
<Accordion title="False Positives (Valid Content Marked Invalid)">
|
|
**Possible Causes:**
|
|
- Threshold too high for creative or interpretive tasks
|
|
- Context doesn't cover all valid aspects of the output
|
|
- Evaluation model being overly conservative
|
|
|
|
**Solutions:**
|
|
- Lower threshold or use default validation
|
|
- Expand context to include broader acceptable content
|
|
- Test with different evaluation models
|
|
</Accordion>
|
|
|
|
<Accordion title="Evaluation Errors">
|
|
**Possible Causes:**
|
|
- Network connectivity issues
|
|
- LLM model unavailable or rate limited
|
|
- Malformed task output or context
|
|
|
|
**Solutions:**
|
|
- Check network connectivity and LLM service status
|
|
- Implement retry logic for transient failures
|
|
- Validate task output format before guardrail evaluation
|
|
</Accordion>
|
|
|
|
<Card title="Need Help?" icon="headset" href="mailto:support@crewai.com">
|
|
Contact our support team for assistance with hallucination guardrail configuration or troubleshooting.
|
|
</Card>
|