Comparisons / Anthropic Agent SDK vs LlamaIndex
Anthropic Agent SDK vs LlamaIndex: Which Agent Framework to Use?
Anthropic Agent SDK vs LlamaIndex, head to head
Anthropic Agent SDK and LlamaIndex 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.
The Anthropic Agent SDK packages Claude Code's agent loop as a library.
LlamaIndex started as a RAG framework — connect your data, query it with an LLM.
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 Anthropic Agent SDK if
Pick Anthropic Agent SDK if the Anthropic Agent SDK's real value is packaging Claude Code's battle-tested agent loop with built-in tools and MCP integration. If you want a production agent that reads files, runs commands, and connects to services, it saves significant plumbing. For understanding how agents work, the plain version is more instructive. The tradeoffs in its intro should match how your team already thinks about agents; LlamaIndex will feel like translation if they don't.
Pick LlamaIndex if
Pick LlamaIndex if llamaIndex adds genuine value when your agent needs to query structured or unstructured data as part of its reasoning — that's the index-as-tool pattern, and it's well-executed. But if you're building a general-purpose agent that doesn't need RAG, the agent framework is overhead. The plain Python version of the agent loop is the same 60 lines either way. The tradeoffs in its intro should match how your team already thinks about agents; Anthropic Agent SDK will feel like translation if they don't.
By the numbers
By the numbers
Anthropic Agent SDK
3.1k
582
Python
MIT
2023-01-17
Anthropic
Google, Spark Capital
Yes
LlamaIndex
48.3k
7.2k
Python
MIT
2022-11-02
Jerry Liu
GitHub stats as of April 2026. Stars indicate community interest, not necessarily quality or fit for your use case.
| Concept | Anthropic Agent SDK | LlamaIndex |
|---|---|---|
| Agent | Claude agent with built-in tools, MCP servers, and system prompt | `AgentRunner` with `AgentWorker`, or `ReActAgent` for tool-calling agents |
| Tools | Built-in tools (`bash`, file read/write, web) + MCP server connections | `FunctionTool` for custom tools, `QueryEngineTool` to query an index as a tool |
| Agent Loop | SDK's internal agentic loop with automatic tool dispatch | `AgentRunner.chat()` manages step-by-step execution via `AgentWorker` tasks |
| Sub-Agents | Agents invoke other agents as tools via the SDK | — |
| Lifecycle Hooks | 18 hook events: pre/post tool call, message, error, etc. | — |
| MCP Integration | One-line MCP server config for Playwright, Slack, GitHub, etc. | — |
| RAG Integration | — | `VectorStoreIndex` + `QueryEngineTool` — the agent can query your data as a tool call |
| Memory | — | `ChatMemoryBuffer` with token limit, or custom memory modules |
| Orchestration | — | `AgentRunner` step API for custom control flow, or multi-agent pipelines |
Or build your own in 60 lines
Both Anthropic Agent SDK and LlamaIndex 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 →