clefdecide

Clef vs LLM-as-a-judge

A common pattern is to ask a chat model “Is this spam? Answer yes or no” and parse its reply. Clef is built for exactly that job: you define the question and the allowed answers, and it returns a probability for each one.

The difference

Clef / Clef-FlashChat LLM as a judge
OutputProbability per allowed answer, in a fixed JSON schemaFree text you prompt into a format and then parse
Invalid answersOnly your options can come backPossible: extra words, a wrong label, broken JSON
ThresholdsBuilt in: act above 0.9, review 0.5–0.9Needs log-probs or repeated sampling, if available
Many questionsUp to 64 typed questions on one stateOne long prompt, one long answer to parse
Cost driverInput tokens; our runs returned 0 output tokensInput and output tokens, more with reasoning
ExplanationsNoneYes, it can justify the answer

When Clef is the better fit

When a chat LLM is still better

Use both

A practical setup: run Clef-Flash on everything, act automatically on confident answers, and send only the low-confidence cases to Clef (27B), a chat model, or a person. See Clef vs Clef-Flash and real examples with thresholds.

FAQ

Is Clef more accurate than an LLM judge?

We haven’t benchmarked it and don’t claim so. Accuracy depends on your data. Run the same 50 examples through both and compare.

Can Clef explain its answer?

No. It returns probabilities, not reasons. If you need a written justification, use a chat model, or run Clef first and ask a chat model to explain only the uncertain cases.

Do I need to parse the output?

No. Answers come back in a fixed JSON shape with one entry per question id, so there is no free text to parse or validate.

Token counts are from our own Clef-Flash runs on 2026-10-02. Prices from Cloudflare’s Workers AI model pages, checked 2026-10-02.