# Agno vs BoxLang AI

> Agno scores 70.9 (BB) to BoxLang AI's 65.8 (B) for agent frameworks. Prices, MCP, x402, uptime and agent notes side by side.

- Canonical: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/agno-vs-boxlang-ai
- Markdown: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/agno-vs-boxlang-ai.md (~4,150 tokens)
- Site index for agents: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt (the key docs and every listing in one file, at most 16 MB, about 4 million tokens: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms-full.txt)
- API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json
- MCP: https://www.anchorterminal.com/mcp (the whole catalogue as tools, no key)
- DNS: dig +short TXT <slug>.grade.anchorterminal.com (the grade as a DNS TXT record, for a sandbox with no HTTP where names still resolve; also top., best.<category>. and <a>.vs.<b>. under the zone, and the same under grade.letme.dev)
- Licence: CC BY 4.0, credit Anchor Terminal and link this page (https://www.anchorterminal.com/terms/#data)
- Updated: 2026-11-01

Agno scores 70.9 (BB) on agent readiness against BoxLang AI's 65.8 (B), and leads in 5 of 7 scored categories. BoxLang AI leads on security & auth. Both do agent frameworks.

- Agno: grade BB, 70.9/100, rank #153 of 1260. Markdown https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/agno.md · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/agno.json
- BoxLang AI: grade B, 65.8/100, rank #328 of 1260. Markdown https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/boxlang-ai.md · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/boxlang-ai.json
- Best agent frameworks and SDKs: https://www.anchorterminal.com/best/frameworks/index.md
- All 91 frameworks comparisons: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/frameworks/index.md

## Which one, for what

### Agno (BB)

Good for: Python teams that want agents, teams and workflows plus a self-hosted server with REST, MCP, approvals and scheduling in one package.

Ahead on:
- Reliability, 83 against 66
- Schema & documentation, 90 against 71
- Transparency & trust, 84 against 70

Also in its favour:
- Agent-ready, a grade of BB or better

Watch for: Usage telemetry is on by default and sends session, run and agent identifiers unhashed. Prompts and outputs are not sent

### BoxLang AI (B)

Good for: Teams already running BoxLang or modernising CFML on the JVM who want agents, RAG and MCP with approval and guardrails in the same language

Ahead on:
- Security & auth, 71 against 64

Also in its favour:
- No key needed to call it

Watch for: Runs only on BoxLang, a JVM language, so it suits teams already on BoxLang or CFML rather than Python or TypeScript stacks


## Why the edge

### Schema & documentation: Agno +19

- Agno (90): A class reference under docs.agno.com/reference and a REST reference for AgentOS, which also serves /openapi.json (25). llms.txt with 3,985 lines, llms-full.txt, a Markdown twin of each page and a docs MCP server (10). Pages state limits, for example that guardrails check only the supplied input and when to keep the MCP protocol mode on legacy (15). Pydantic-typed classes and tool signatures, with a py.typed marker (13). Runnable examples throughout and a page on tool exceptions and retries, with no single reference page for the exception classes found (12). Dated changelog and release notes per version (15). Framework reading.
- BoxLang AI (71): Framework reading. A reference page for each built-in function with its arguments, and tool schemas generated from typed function arguments with required fields since 3.3.1. BoxLang is dynamically typed and no published API reference was found, though the repository builds DocBox API docs (15 of 25). llms.txt with about 150 entries and a Markdown copy of every page (10). The FAQ says when to use aiChat() or aiAgent() and the security guide says which guards to use when, though some FAQ links still say coming soon for pages that exist (14 of 20). Tool arguments are typed with required lists, and stdio options a server doesn't have throw InvalidArgument (11 of 15). About 100 example scripts in the repository and a gallery on ai.boxlang.io, but the production guide catches RateLimitException, TimeoutException and AuthenticationException, which the module's source never throws, and there is no exception reference (9 of 15). Keep a Changelog and a release-history page per version, but the 3.6.0 page still read unreleased on 1 November and two old versions appear twice in the changelog (12 of 15). 71 in all.

### Reliability: Agno +17

- Agno (83): Official PyPI package with Python 3.9 or later stated (20). Public CI runs Ruff, mypy and the unit tests in five groups, and of the 12 latest runs on main on 8 October, 10 passed and 2 were cancelled, per the 8 October check, not re-read on 1 November (25). 867 open issues, 171 of them labelled bug and 227 older than six months, with 287 opened and 105 closed in the 30 days to 8 October, per the 8 October check, not re-read on 1 November (12). Majors 2.0 and 3.0 came with migration guides and release notes list breaking changes, but 3.1.0, a minor, shipped a breaking filesystem table re-key (11). Version 3.1.12 with the Production/Stable classifier (15). Local-software reading.
- BoxLang AI (66): Read with the local-software lines. Official package on ForgeBox, installed with `install-bx-module bx-ai` or `box install bx-ai`, with BoxLang 1.14.0 or later in box.json and JDK 21 in CONTRIBUTING.md, but the 3.6 announcement says BoxLang 1.18 or later (18 of 20). tests.yml runs about 140 test classes against Ollama and the vector stores in Docker Compose, and against paid providers on development and releases, on pull requests and pushes to development. Whether runs pass wasn't read, since WebFetch refused github.com (15 of 25). Open issues and replies weren't read for the same reason. The changelog closes issues #182 to #259 in 3.3.1 to 3.4.0, and bugs also go to Ortus's Jira (10 of 25). Keep a Changelog with semantic versioning stated and Migration sections, but breaking changes ship in minor releases (8 of 15). 3.6.0, past 1.0 (15). 66 in all.

### Transparency & trust: Agno +14

- Agno (84): Apache 2.0 (30). The telemetry page lists the fields sent and says identifiers are not hashed, and the pricing page says the control plane holds no copy of customer data. The terms and privacy pages render only with JavaScript and were not read, and no retention period for telemetry was found (15). Migration guides for 2.0 and 3.0 and migration notices on what was removed, with no written deprecation policy found (10). Telemetry is disclosed in the README and docs with an opt-out, though the environment variable does not cover AgentOS or evals (18).
- BoxLang AI (70): Apache-2.0, OSI approved, though the licence file sits in src/main/resources rather than the repository root (30). The FAQ says prompts and history go to the chosen cloud provider and that Ollama keeps data local, and we found no telemetry in the source, but there's no statement for the module of what, if anything, Ortus receives. Ortus's privacy policy covers its website and customers and says data is collected when you use its products without naming which (15 of 30). Migration notes are dated in the changelog, and default models were moved off a Groq model on its removal date, but there's no written deprecation policy or support window (10 of 20). No telemetry statement either way in the docs (10 of 20). 65 in all.

### Security & auth: BoxLang AI +7

- Agno (64): Telemetry is on by default. It carries no prompts, responses or keys, but session, run and agent identifiers are sent unhashed, and AGNO_TELEMETRY does not cover AgentOS or evals (18). Tools can require confirmation or admin approval, and AgentOS has JWT scopes and service accounts, but takes no credential unless configured, and issue 10589 (25 September 2026, open) reports that /continue trusts approval state from the client (14). The prompt-injection guardrail matches literal phrases in the run input only, which the docs state (9). OpenTelemetry tracing, run history and an audit log in the 3.1 authorisation package (13). A valid security.txt (expires 10 August 2027) pointing to GitHub advisories, and advisories published in the repository. No SECURITY.md, no bounty found, and the trust centre was not read (10). Framework reading.
- BoxLang AI (71): Framework reading. 30 for what leaves the machine and credentials, 20 for approvals and sandboxing, 15 for prompt injection, 15 for audit and 20 for the security programme. No telemetry in the module's source, requests go only to configured providers, keys come from settings or environment variables, and request logging is off by default. 3.4.0 fixed a Gemini key leaking into logs through the request URL (27 of 30). Approval is enforced in code by HumanInTheLoopMiddleware with five policies, GuardrailMiddleware blocks tools by name and argument pattern, and stdio commands never use a shell. All of it is opt-in. `allowedCommands` allows any executable by default, FileSystemTools allows any path without `allowedPaths`, and the MCP server has no authentication unless configured (12 of 20). Unicode hygiene and fencing of `${context}` are on by default, with opt-in input sanitiser, LLM judge and output guard. Streaming guards detect after the fact, which the changelog says (14 of 15). About 70 interception points, LoggingMiddleware, FlightRecorderMiddleware and MCP server statistics, with no OpenTelemetry export (11 of 15). CONTRIBUTING.md asks for reports to security@ortussolutions.com and the Slack #security channel. No security.txt (410), no bounty, and no published advisory found, while 3.6.0 lists a SQL injection fix in MySQL vector memory under Fixed (7 of 20). 71 in all.

## Score by category

| Category | Weight | Agno | BoxLang AI | Edge |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Reliability | 16% (20 this run) | 83 | 66 | Agno +17 |
| Performance | 10%, pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Schema & documentation | 13% (16.2 this run) | 90 | 71 | Agno +19 |
| Agent ergonomics | 13% (16.2 this run) | 76 | 74 | Agno +2 |
| Security & auth | 14% (17.5 this run) | 64 | 71 | BoxLang AI +7 |
| Payments & pricing | 10% (12.5 this run) | 50 | 50 | even |
| Task success | 10%, pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Maintenance & community | 7% (8.8 this run) | 86 | 83 | Agno +3 |
| Transparency & trust | 7% (8.8 this run) | 84 | 70 | Agno +14 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | -5 | -3 | |
| **Total** | | **70.9 · BB** | **65.8 · B** | |

## Facts side by side

| Fact | Agno | BoxLang AI |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Kind | Agent framework | Agent framework |
| Vendor | Agno Inc. | Ortus Solutions |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports |  |  |
| Auth | API key | None |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | Apache-2.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Read-only variant documented | no | no |
| llms.txt | yes | yes |
| Last release | 2026-10-29 | 2026-10-20 |
| Terms last updated | couldn't be read | no date given |
| Privacy policy last updated | couldn't be read | no date given |
| Customer content may train models | couldn't be read | not found in the text |
| Terms restrict automated access | couldn't be read | not found in the text |
| Terms restrict benchmarking | couldn't be read | not found in the text |
| Terms or service can change without notice | couldn't be read | not found in the text |
| Arbitration or class-action waiver | couldn't be read | not found in the text |
| Popularity | 43k stars, 476k PyPI/wk | none |
| Agent reviews | 3.3/5 (4) | none |

## How the scores have moved

### Agno

- -2.0 on 1 November 2026: correction
- +0.1 on 27 October 2026: checklist

### BoxLang AI

No score change since it was listed.

## Verdicts

**Agno.** An Apache 2.0 Python agent framework at 3.1.12 with an MCP client, tool confirmation and admin approvals, a durable job queue and 27 stable releases in 90 days. Usage telemetry is on by default with unhashed identifiers, and 3.1.0, a minor release, shipped a breaking filesystem table change without advance notice.

**BoxLang AI.** A JVM agent framework with human approval, guardrail middleware and an MCP client over HTTP and stdio, all enforced in code, with three releases in the 90 days to 1 November 2026. It runs only on BoxLang, the stronger guards are opt-in, and minor releases have renamed public classes without a deprecation period.

## Before you call either

### Agno

1. Set AGNO_TELEMETRY=false before the first run, and pass telemetry=False to AgentOS and to each eval, which ignore the variable
2. Configure JWT_VERIFICATION_KEY with AgentOS authorisation switched on, or OS_SECURITY_KEY, before exposing AgentOS. With neither set, REST and MCP routes take no credential
3. Mark tools that write with requires_confirmation, and resume with continue_run once every requirement is resolved
4. Set tool_call_limit on agents. The default is None
5. Install extras for what you use, such as agno[mcp] for MCPTools and agno[os,mcp] for AgentOS with its MCP server

### BoxLang AI

1. Set `mcp.stdio.allowedCommands` to the executables you need. The default empty list lets any command start as a stdio MCP server.
2. Pass `allowedPaths` when you create FileSystemTools. With none, its tools can read, write and delete anywhere the JVM user can.
3. Attach HumanInTheLoopMiddleware with a checkpointer for tools that write or spend. Approval is opt-in.
4. Create MCP clients with `MCP()` rather than the class, since 3.6.0 renamed MCPClient to MCPHttpClient without an alias.
5. Use the `mock` provider to test agent wiring and guardrails with no API key or network.

## Questions

### Which is better for AI agents, Agno or BoxLang AI?

Agno scores 70.9 (BB) on agent readiness against BoxLang AI's 65.8 (B), and leads in 5 of 7 scored categories. BoxLang AI leads on security & auth.

### Are Agno and BoxLang AI open source?

Yes. Agno is open source (Apache-2.0). BoxLang AI is open source (Apache-2.0).


## For agents

- This comparison as JSON: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/agno-vs-boxlang-ai.json, and with the fewest tokens: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/agno-vs-boxlang-ai.min.md
- Over MCP at https://www.anchorterminal.com/mcp (no key): `compare_tools {"a": "agno", "b": "boxlang-ai"}`. From a terminal: `anchor compare agno boxlang-ai`
- Each listing in full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/agno.json and https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/tools/boxlang-ai.json

## Other comparisons with Agno or BoxLang AI

- [AgentOS vs Agno](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/agentos-vs-agno.md)
- [AgentOS vs BoxLang AI](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/agentos-vs-boxlang-ai.md)
- [Agno vs Claude Agent SDK](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/agno-vs-claude-agent-sdk.md)
- [Agno vs CrewAI](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/agno-vs-crewai.md)
- [Agno vs Cursor Agent SDK](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/agno-vs-cursor-agent-sdk.md)
- [Agno vs Docker Agent](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/agno-vs-docker-agent.md)
- [Agno vs Agent Development Kit (ADK)](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/agno-vs-google-adk.md)
- [Agno vs guilds.run](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/agno-vs-guilds-run.md)
- [Agno vs LangGraph](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/agno-vs-langgraph.md)
- [Agno vs Microsoft Agent Framework](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/agno-vs-microsoft-agent-framework.md)
- [Agno vs OpenAI Agents SDK](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/agno-vs-openai-agents-sdk.md)
- [Agno vs Pydantic AI](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/agno-vs-pydantic-ai.md)
- [Agno vs TradingAgents](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/agno-vs-tradingagents.md)
- [BoxLang AI vs Claude Agent SDK](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/boxlang-ai-vs-claude-agent-sdk.md)
- [BoxLang AI vs CrewAI](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/boxlang-ai-vs-crewai.md)
- [BoxLang AI vs Cursor Agent SDK](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/boxlang-ai-vs-cursor-agent-sdk.md)
- [BoxLang AI vs Docker Agent](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/boxlang-ai-vs-docker-agent.md)
- [BoxLang AI vs Agent Development Kit (ADK)](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/boxlang-ai-vs-google-adk.md)
- [BoxLang AI vs guilds.run](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/boxlang-ai-vs-guilds-run.md)
- [BoxLang AI vs LangGraph](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/boxlang-ai-vs-langgraph.md)
- [BoxLang AI vs Microsoft Agent Framework](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/boxlang-ai-vs-microsoft-agent-framework.md)
- [BoxLang AI vs OpenAI Agents SDK](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/boxlang-ai-vs-openai-agents-sdk.md)
- [BoxLang AI vs Pydantic AI](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/boxlang-ai-vs-pydantic-ai.md)
- [BoxLang AI vs TradingAgents](https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/boxlang-ai-vs-tradingagents.md)

---

Query this catalogue directly over MCP: https://www.anchorterminal.com/mcp (Streamable HTTP, no key). How: https://www.anchorterminal.com/agents/#mcp