Comparisons / ControlFlow vs Mastra
ControlFlow vs Mastra: Which Agent Framework to Use?
ControlFlow vs Mastra, head to head
ControlFlow and Mastra 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.
ControlFlow by Prefect flips the typical agent framework: instead of defining agents that choose tasks, you define tasks and assign agents to them.
Mastra is a TypeScript-first framework for building AI agents, from the team behind Gatsby.
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 ControlFlow if
Pick ControlFlow if controlFlow's task-centric model is a genuinely different way to think about agent orchestration — define what you want, not how to get it. The Prefect integration adds real production value. But if your workflow is linear and your tasks are simple, plain function composition does the same job with less ceremony. The tradeoffs in its intro should match how your team already thinks about agents; Mastra will feel like translation if they don't.
Pick Mastra if
Pick Mastra if mastra is the best option for TypeScript teams that want a batteries-included agent framework without leaving the Node.js ecosystem. The workflow engine and Studio are genuinely productive. For simple agents or Python teams, the plain approach avoids an unnecessary dependency. The tradeoffs in its intro should match how your team already thinks about agents; ControlFlow will feel like translation if they don't.
By the numbers
By the numbers
ControlFlow
1.5k
120
Python
Apache-2.0
2024-05-01
Prefect
Mastra
22.7k
1.8k
TypeScript
Apache-2.0
2024-08-06
Mastra AI
Spark Capital, Y Combinator
Series A ($22M, Apr 2026 — $35M total)
244.0k
GitHub stats as of April 2026. Stars indicate community interest, not necessarily quality or fit for your use case.
| Concept | ControlFlow | Mastra |
|---|---|---|
| Agent | `cf.Agent()` with name, model, instructions, and tool access | `new Agent({ model, instructions, tools })` with automatic tool dispatch |
| Tools | Python functions passed to `Task()` or `Agent()` as tool lists | `createTool({ name, schema, execute })` with Zod validation |
| Task | `cf.Task()` with `result_type`, `instructions`, `agents`, and `dependencies` | — |
| Flow | `@cf.flow` decorator composing tasks with dependency resolution | — |
| Multi-Agent | Multiple `cf.Agent()` instances assigned to different tasks in one flow | — |
| Observability | Built-in Prefect integration for logging, retries, and monitoring | — |
| Workflows | — | `Workflow` class with `.step()`, `.then()`, `.branch()` for orchestration |
| RAG | — | Built-in document syncing, chunking, embedding, and vector search |
| Memory | — | Short-term thread memory + long-term vector memory across sessions |
| Studio | — | Mastra Studio: local GUI for testing agents, viewing traces, debugging |
Or build your own in 60 lines
Both ControlFlow and Mastra 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 →