Comparisons / Agno vs Pydantic AI
Agno vs Pydantic AI: Which Agent Framework to Use?
Agno vs Pydantic AI, head to head
Agno and Pydantic AI both let you build an agent, but they sit in different parts of the stack and they assume different things about who's writing the code.
Agno (formerly Phidata) is a lightweight Python framework for building agents.
Pydantic AI is a type-safe agent framework built by the Pydantic team.
Underneath, both wrap the same thing: a model call, a tool dispatch, a loop. The decision is about which abstraction your team wants to think in day to day, and which ecosystem you're willing to inherit along with it. There's an honest, framework-free version of the same pattern in about 60 lines of Python in the lesson at the bottom of this page — useful as a baseline regardless of which framework wins.
Pick Agno if
Pick Agno if agno adds value when you want a batteries-included agent with minimal boilerplate — especially for multi-modal agents or team orchestration. But each of its abstractions maps to a small piece of plain Python. If your agent is straightforward, writing it directly gives you full control with zero framework overhead. The tradeoffs in its intro should match how your team already thinks about agents; Pydantic AI will feel like translation if they don't.
Pick Pydantic AI if
Pick Pydantic AI if pydantic AI adds genuine value if you want compile-time type checking across your agent's tools, outputs, and dependencies. If you already use Pydantic in your stack, it fits naturally. But the core agent logic — loop, dispatch, validate — is still ~60 lines of Python you can own entirely. The tradeoffs in its intro should match how your team already thinks about agents; Agno will feel like translation if they don't.
By the numbers
By the numbers
Agno
39.2k
5.2k
Python
Apache-2.0
2022-05-04
Agno (formerly Phidata)
Pydantic AI
16.1k
1.9k
Python
MIT
2024-06-21
Pydantic (Samuel Colvin)
GitHub stats as of April 2026. Stars indicate community interest, not necessarily quality or fit for your use case.
| Concept | Agno | Pydantic AI |
|---|---|---|
| Agent | `Agent(model=OpenAIChat(), instructions=[...])` class with `run()` method | `Agent()` class with typed `result_type`, system prompt, and `model` parameter |
| Tools | Function tools via `@tool` decorator or built-in toolkits (web search, SQL, etc.) | `@agent.tool` decorator with typed parameters and Pydantic validation |
| Agent Loop | `Agent.run()` handles tool dispatch internally, configurable via `show_tool_calls` | `agent.run()` handles the tool-call loop internally with typed dispatch |
| Memory / Knowledge | Knowledge bases (PDF, URL, vector DB) injected via `knowledge` param + built-in memory | — |
| Multi-Agent (Teams) | `Team` class with `agents` list, `mode` (sequential, parallel, coordinate), and shared memory | — |
| Storage | `SqlAgentStorage`, `PostgresAgentStorage` for persisting sessions and state | — |
| Structured Output | — | `result_type=MyModel` enforces Pydantic model on final LLM response |
| Model Switching | — | Swap `model='openai:gpt-4o'` to `model='anthropic:claude-sonnet'` in one line |
| Dependencies | — | `RunContext[DepsType]` injects typed dependencies into tools at runtime |
Or build your own in 60 lines
Both Agno and Pydantic AI implement the same 8 patterns. An agent is a function. Tools are a dict. The loop is a while loop. The whole thing composes in ~60 lines of Python.
No framework. No dependencies. No opinions. Just the code.
Build it from scratch →