Comparisons / DSPy vs Smolagents
DSPy vs Smolagents: Which Agent Framework to Use?
DSPy vs Smolagents, head to head
DSPy and Smolagents 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.
DSPy replaces hand-written prompts with compiled modules.
Smolagents is HuggingFace's minimalist agent library.
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 DSPy if
Pick DSPy if dSPy's real innovation is automated prompt optimization — replacing manual prompt engineering with algorithmic tuning. This is genuinely novel and valuable for production systems where prompt quality matters at scale. For simple agents or learning, hand-written prompts are easier to understand and modify. The tradeoffs in its intro should match how your team already thinks about agents; Smolagents will feel like translation if they don't.
Pick Smolagents if
Pick Smolagents if smolagents lives up to its name — it's genuinely minimal and the code-agent approach is a real innovation that reduces LLM calls by ~30%. If you want a lightweight agent library with HuggingFace ecosystem access, it's excellent. For understanding the fundamentals, the plain version is even simpler. The tradeoffs in its intro should match how your team already thinks about agents; DSPy will feel like translation if they don't.
By the numbers
By the numbers
DSPy
33.4k
2.8k
Python
MIT
2023-01-09
Stanford NLP (Omar Khattab)
Smolagents
26.4k
2.4k
Python
Apache-2.0
2024-12-05
Hugging Face
GitHub stats as of April 2026. Stars indicate community interest, not necessarily quality or fit for your use case.
| Concept | DSPy | Smolagents |
|---|---|---|
| Agent | `dspy.ReAct` module with signature and tools | `CodeAgent` or `ToolCallingAgent` with model and tools list |
| Prompts | `dspy.Signature` defines input/output fields, compiled to optimized prompts | — |
| Optimization | `dspy.BootstrapFewShot`, `MIPROv2` auto-tune prompts against a metric | — |
| Tools | Tools passed to `ReAct` module as callable list | `@tool` decorator or `Tool` class with name, description, and callable |
| Chaining | `dspy.ChainOfThought`, `dspy.Module` with `forward()` composition | — |
| Evaluation | `dspy.Evaluate` with metric functions and dev sets | — |
| Code Actions | — | `CodeAgent` writes Python code as its action, executed in sandbox |
| Sandbox | — | E2B, Docker, Modal, or Pyodide sandbox for safe code execution |
| Agent Loop | — | Internal loop: think (LLM reasons), act (code/tool call), observe (result) |
| Model Support | — | HuggingFace Hub models, OpenAI, Anthropic, local via LiteLLM |
Or build your own in 60 lines
Both DSPy and Smolagents 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 →