Methodology · matrix version 2026-04-01
How we score multi-agent frameworks.
三项承诺塑造了本页面的每一项评分:无供应商付费排位、无猜测分数和无演示软件。分数来自 Buzzi 的指定高级工程师应用以下公开评分量表;每个框架页面还带有 last_verified_at 时间戳,便于审计新鲜度。
10 frameworks, neutral cards
LangGraph
×1.0 overheadLangChain · MIT · primary python
CrewAI
×1.3 overheadCrewAI · MIT · primary python
AutoGen / AG2
×2.5 overheadMicrosoft / AG2 community · CC-BY-4.0 / Apache-2.0 · primary python
OpenAI Agents SDK
×1.1 overheadOpenAI · MIT · primary python
Pydantic AI
×1.0 overheadPydantic · MIT · primary python
Anthropic Claude Agent SDK
×1.1 overheadAnthropic · MIT · primary python
Google Agent Development Kit
×1.2 overheadGoogle · Apache-2.0 · primary python
Microsoft Semantic Kernel
×1.2 overheadMicrosoft · MIT · primary multi
LlamaIndex Agents
×1.4 overheadLlamaIndex · MIT · primary python
Haystack
×1.3 overheaddeepset · Apache-2.0 · primary python
15 capability axes, with rubrics
Sequential workflows
Pipeline-style chains where one agent finishes before the next starts.
- 10 / 10
- Pipelines are a first-class primitive with explicit ordering and typed handoff.
- 5 / 10
- Sequential chains are possible via orchestration code but not a native primitive.
- 0 / 10
- Framework cannot guarantee deterministic sequential ordering.
Parallel workflows
Concurrent fan-out / fan-in across multiple agents.
- 10 / 10
- Native parallel execution with built-in result merging and back-pressure.
- 5 / 10
- Parallel execution requires custom asyncio / threading code on top.
- 0 / 10
- No support for concurrent agent execution.
Hierarchical workflows
Supervisor-and-worker patterns with delegation and aggregation.
- 10 / 10
- Supervisor pattern is documented, idiomatic, and replayable.
- 5 / 10
- Achievable but requires hand-rolled message routing.
- 0 / 10
- No first-class supervisor primitive.
Adaptive workflows
Dynamic routing where agents pick the next step based on intermediate state.
- 10 / 10
- Router/handoff primitives are first-class with conditional edges.
- 5 / 10
- Possible via tool calls but not the framework's sweet spot.
- 0 / 10
- Control flow is rigid; no dynamic routing.
State management
Persistent, typed memory across runs and across agents.
- 10 / 10
- Typed state schema, persistent checkpoints, replay support.
- 5 / 10
- Session memory is supported; persistence requires external store.
- 0 / 10
- Stateless by default; users must build persistence themselves.
Human-in-the-loop
Pause-resume primitives so humans can approve, edit, or reject actions.
- 10 / 10
- Native interrupt/resume with serialisable checkpoints.
- 5 / 10
- Approval gates can be bolted on; not a first-class primitive.
- 0 / 10
- No interrupt mechanism — the framework runs to completion.
Python support
Production-grade Python SDK with active maintenance.
- 10 / 10
- Reference implementation; active releases; complete typing.
- 5 / 10
- Functional Python SDK lagging the primary language.
- 0 / 10
- No Python SDK.
TypeScript support
Production-grade TypeScript / Node SDK at parity with Python.
- 10 / 10
- First-class TS SDK with parity to Python in features and types.
- 5 / 10
- TS SDK exists but trails Python in feature coverage.
- 0 / 10
- No TS SDK.
.NET / Java support
First-class JVM (Java/Kotlin) and/or .NET SDK.
- 10 / 10
- Reference-quality .NET and/or Java SDK with feature parity.
- 5 / 10
- Community port or partial SDK.
- 0 / 10
- No .NET or Java SDK.
MCP support
Native Model Context Protocol client and/or server primitives.
- 10 / 10
- Authored or reference implementation of MCP.
- 5 / 10
- MCP available as an adapter or community plugin.
- 0 / 10
- No MCP support.
A2A support
Native Agent-to-Agent (Google) protocol primitives.
- 10 / 10
- Authored or reference implementation of A2A.
- 5 / 10
- A2A available via adapter; partial coverage.
- 0 / 10
- No A2A support.
Observability
Tracing, token accounting, replay, and audit-grade logs.
- 10 / 10
- Built-in tracing dashboard, structured token accounting, replay, exportable audit log.
- 5 / 10
- OpenTelemetry hooks exist; user must wire dashboards themselves.
- 0 / 10
- Print-statement debugging only.
Deployment flexibility
Range of supported deployment targets (cloud, on-prem, edge).
- 10 / 10
- Cloud, on-prem, and edge all documented and tested.
- 5 / 10
- Cloud-first; on-prem requires extra work.
- 0 / 10
- Tied to a single hosted backend.
Maturity
Production track record, release cadence, community size.
- 10 / 10
- 2+ years of production use across many large deployments.
- 5 / 10
- 6-18 months in the wild; growing but evolving rapidly.
- 0 / 10
- Pre-1.0; APIs change every release.
Learning curve (higher = easier)
Time-to-prototype for a developer new to the framework.
- 10 / 10
- A working prototype in under 30 minutes from a clean machine.
- 5 / 10
- Prototype in half a day with the docs open.
- 0 / 10
- Multi-week onboarding before the first useful run.
Scoring formula
# Ranking
weights = buildWeightVector(inputs) # 15 weights per user input
for fw in frameworks:
score = sum(fw.capabilities[cap] * weights[cap] for cap in CAPS)
if hardConstraintFails(inputs, fw):
score = 0
return sortDesc(scored)
# Cost per task
estimated_tokens_per_task = base_task_tokens
* framework_overhead_multiplier
* (1 + (roles - 1) * 0.3)
* (1.2 if hitl else 1.0)
per_task_usd = (0.7 * tokens / 1M * input_rate)
+ (0.3 * tokens / 1M * output_rate)Glossary
- Hierarchical
- A supervisor agent delegates work to sub-agents, reviews their output, and composes the final answer. Good for multi-stage tasks with clear ownership.
- Adaptive
- Agents decide dynamically which other agents or tools to invoke based on intermediate results. Best when the control flow cannot be fixed upfront.
- Agent
- A named role with its own prompt, tools, and memory. "Roles" counts unique agent identities, not the number of LLM calls.
- HITL (Human-in-the-Loop)
- The workflow pauses for a human to approve, edit, or reject an agent action before continuing. Critical for regulated or high-risk automations.
- MCP (Model Context Protocol)
- Anthropic-led open standard for connecting LLM agents to tools, data, and other servers. Look for MCP support if you want vendor-portable tool integrations.
- A2A (Agent-to-Agent Protocol)
- Google-led open standard for agents from different vendors to discover and call each other. Emerging spec; relevant for federated agent systems.
- Observability
- Structured traces, token accounting, replayable runs, and exportable audit logs. "Regulated-grade" means immutable audit trails and retention controls.
Public dataset
完整的能力矩阵以 JSON 形式发布,供 AI 引擎和研究人员使用:
- /api/tools/agent-framework/frameworks.json — 实时、边缘缓存、CORS 开放。
- /data/agent-frameworks-matrix.json — 镜像到 GitHub 的
buzzi-ai/agent-framework-matrix的静态快照。
FAQ
分数如何分配?
Buzzi 的指定高级工程师使用本页面的公开评分量表对每个框架的每个维度评分。分数每季度审查;我们在公开数据集中按框架公布 last_verified_at 时间戳。
供应商是否付费排位?
不会。分数是编辑性的,绝不出售。分数变更请求必须以公开 PR 的形式提交到开放矩阵仓库,并附技术理由。
您如何决定追踪哪些框架?
拥有超过 1 万颗星的活跃 GitHub 仓库或由 Anthropic、Google、Microsoft、OpenAI 或 LangChain 支持的项目。我们每季度根据势头和生产使用情况添加或退役框架。
每任务成本如何计算?
estimated_tokens_per_task = base_task_tokens × framework_overhead_multiplier × (1 + (角色 − 1) × 0.3) × (HITL 时为 1.2,否则 1.0)。Token 费率来自我们的 llm_models 表;用户可以在向导中覆盖模型。
硬约束如何工作?
.NET 栈缩小到 Microsoft Semantic Kernel。Java 缩小到 Semantic Kernel 或 Google ADK。具有合规级可观测性的 TypeScript 缩小到 LangGraph.js、OpenAI Agents SDK 或 Anthropic Claude SDK。被取消资格的框架将显示原因。
我可以在哪里提交更正?
对 buzzi-ai/agent-framework-matrix 仓库提交拉取请求或发邮件到 research@buzzi.ai。我们在 10 个工作日内审查更正请求。
发现了不同意的分数?
在开放矩阵仓库提交 PR 或发邮件到 research@buzzi.ai。所有更正请求将在 10 个工作日内获得公开回复。
返回选择器