Comparisons / Anthropic Agent SDK vs Pydantic AI
Anthropic Agent SDK vs Pydantic AI: Which Agent Framework to Use?
The Anthropic Agent SDK packages Claude Code's agent loop as a library. Pydantic AI is a type-safe agent framework built by the Pydantic team. Here is how they compare — paradigm, ecosystem, and the use cases each one is actually built for.
By the numbers
Anthropic Agent SDK
3.1k
582
Python
MIT
2023-01-17
Anthropic
Google, Spark Capital
Yes
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 | Anthropic Agent SDK | Pydantic AI |
|---|---|---|
| Agent | Claude agent with built-in tools, MCP servers, and system prompt | `Agent()` class with typed `result_type`, system prompt, and `model` parameter |
| Tools | Built-in tools (`bash`, file read/write, web) + MCP server connections | `@agent.tool` decorator with typed parameters and Pydantic validation |
| Agent Loop | SDK's internal agentic loop with automatic tool dispatch | `agent.run()` handles the tool-call loop internally with typed dispatch |
| 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. | — |
| 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 |
Anthropic Agent SDK vs Pydantic AI, head to head
Anthropic Agent SDK The Anthropic Agent SDK packages Claude Code's agent loop as a library.
Pydantic AI Pydantic AI is a type-safe agent framework built by the Pydantic team.
Both wrap the same underlying agent pattern — an LLM call, a tool dispatch, a loop — in different abstractions. The choice between them is mostly about which mental model and ecosystem fits the team you have, not which one is technically more capable.
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. Anthropic Agent SDK is the right fit when the tradeoffs in its intro line up with how your team actually wants to work day-to-day; Pydantic AI would force you to translate.
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. Pydantic AI is the right fit when the tradeoffs in its intro line up with how your team actually wants to work day-to-day; Anthropic Agent SDK would force you to translate.
What both add
Both Anthropic Agent SDK and Pydantic AI pull in a class hierarchy and a dependency tree to wrap what is, at the core, an HTTP POST in a while loop. If your use case is straightforward — one provider, a handful of tools, a single agent — the framework cost may exceed the framework benefit. The lesson below shows the same pattern in ~60 lines without either dependency.
Or build your own in 60 lines
Both Anthropic Agent SDK 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 →