multi-model playground with version-controlled prompt variants
Interactive web-based environment for testing and iterating on prompts across multiple LLM providers (OpenAI, Anthropic, Ollama, LiteLLM) with automatic version tracking and configuration snapshots. Uses a FastAPI backend that manages prompt state, model selection, and parameter variations, while the Next.js frontend provides real-time prompt editing with side-by-side output comparison. Each variant is persisted as an immutable snapshot linked to an Application, enabling rollback and A/B testing workflows.
Unique: Implements variant management as first-class entities linked to Applications with immutable snapshots, rather than treating versions as linear history. Uses LiteLLM proxy service to abstract provider differences, enabling single-interface testing across OpenAI, Anthropic, Ollama, and 100+ other models without code changes.
vs alternatives: Faster iteration than Promptfoo because variants are persisted server-side with automatic state management, and supports real-time collaboration via shared workspace sessions rather than CLI-only workflows.
automated evaluation pipeline with 20+ built-in evaluators
Executes parameterized evaluation workflows against testsets using a modular evaluator registry that supports both built-in evaluators (regex matching, LLM-as-judge, similarity scoring) and custom Python evaluators. The evaluation system uses a task queue pattern (via Celery or direct execution) to parallelize evaluator runs across test cases, with results aggregated into a comparison matrix. Evaluators are configured via JSON schema, allowing non-technical users to customize thresholds and prompts without code changes.
Unique: Decouples evaluator logic from execution via a plugin registry pattern where evaluators are Python classes implementing a standard interface, allowing users to mix built-in evaluators (regex, similarity, LLM-as-judge) with custom evaluators in a single run. Uses JSON schema generation to auto-expose evaluator parameters in the UI without manual form definition.
vs alternatives: More flexible than Ragas because it supports arbitrary custom evaluators and doesn't require LLM calls for all metrics, reducing cost and latency for simple evaluations like exact-match or regex scoring.
litellm proxy service for multi-provider llm abstraction
Provides a unified API gateway that abstracts differences between LLM providers (OpenAI, Anthropic, Ollama, Cohere, etc.) using the LiteLLM library. The proxy normalizes request/response formats, handles authentication with provider-specific keys, and computes token counts and costs automatically. This enables applications to switch between providers or use multiple providers without code changes. The proxy is deployed as a separate service and handles rate limiting, retries, and fallback logic.
Unique: Leverages LiteLLM library to provide unified API abstraction across 100+ LLM providers without maintaining custom provider integrations. Automatically computes token counts and costs for each request, enabling cost tracking without application-level instrumentation.
vs alternatives: More comprehensive than custom proxy implementations because it supports 100+ providers out-of-the-box and handles token counting/cost calculation automatically, reducing maintenance burden.
evaluation results comparison and analytics dashboard
Provides a web-based dashboard that visualizes evaluation results across variants, testsets, and time periods. The dashboard displays comparison matrices (variant × metric), aggregate statistics (mean, std dev, pass rate), and trend charts showing performance over time. Users can filter results by metadata (model, testset, date range) and export data for external analysis. The dashboard supports custom metric visualization and drill-down into individual test cases to understand failure modes.
Unique: Integrates evaluation results directly into the web UI with interactive filtering and drill-down capabilities, enabling users to explore results without external tools. Supports custom metric visualization and trend analysis to identify performance patterns over time.
vs alternatives: More integrated than external BI tools because evaluation results are queried directly from Agenta's database, eliminating data export/import delays and enabling real-time analysis.
variant execution against testsets with batch processing
Executes a prompt variant (application) against all test cases in a testset, collecting outputs and metrics. The system uses a task queue pattern to parallelize execution across test cases, with configurable concurrency limits to avoid rate limiting. Results are streamed to the frontend as they complete, providing real-time feedback. The system handles failures gracefully, retrying failed cases and collecting error logs for debugging. Execution results are persisted in the database and linked to the variant and testset for later analysis.
Unique: Implements batch execution with real-time streaming results to the frontend, enabling users to see results as they complete rather than waiting for batch completion. Uses task queue pattern for parallelization with configurable concurrency to avoid rate limiting.
vs alternatives: More responsive than traditional batch processing because results are streamed to the frontend in real-time, providing immediate feedback on execution progress.
docker compose deployment with environment configuration
Provides a production-ready Docker Compose configuration for self-hosted deployment of the entire Agenta stack (frontend, backend, database, services). The deployment includes environment variable templates for configuring LLM providers, database connections, and authentication. Supports both OSS (open-source) and EE (enterprise edition) deployments with feature flags. Includes migration scripts for upgrading between versions without data loss.
Unique: Provides a complete Docker Compose stack for self-hosted deployment with environment-based configuration, enabling easy customization without modifying code. Includes migration scripts for version upgrades with data preservation.
vs alternatives: Offers a ready-to-use Docker Compose configuration for self-hosted deployment, whereas competitors like LangSmith or Weights & Biases are primarily SaaS with limited self-hosting options.
litellm proxy service for multi-provider llm access
Provides a unified LLM API proxy (via LiteLLM) that abstracts differences between LLM providers (OpenAI, Anthropic, Cohere, etc.) into a single interface. The proxy handles authentication, rate limiting, retry logic, and cost tracking across providers. Applications can switch between providers by changing a configuration parameter without code changes. Supports streaming responses and function calling across different provider APIs.
Unique: Uses LiteLLM as a unified proxy layer to abstract provider differences, enabling applications to switch between providers via configuration without code changes. Handles authentication, rate limiting, and cost tracking uniformly across providers.
vs alternatives: Provides a built-in multi-provider abstraction via LiteLLM, whereas competitors like LangChain require explicit provider selection in code and don't provide unified cost tracking.
human evaluation workflow with annotation interface
Provides a web-based annotation interface for human raters to score LLM outputs against testsets, with support for multiple annotation types (binary choice, multi-class, Likert scale, free-form feedback). The system tracks annotator identity, timestamps, and inter-rater agreement metrics (Cohen's kappa, Fleiss' kappa) to measure evaluation consistency. Annotations are stored in the backend database and can be compared against automated evaluation results to identify cases where human judgment diverges from metrics.
Unique: Integrates human evaluation results directly into the comparison dashboard alongside automated metrics, enabling side-by-side analysis of where human judgment diverges from automated scoring. Computes inter-rater agreement statistics automatically to surface evaluation criteria that need clarification.
vs alternatives: More integrated than Labelbox because human annotations are stored in the same database as automated evaluations, enabling direct comparison without external data export/import cycles.
+7 more capabilities