Complete pricing guide for AgentEval. Compare all plans, analyze costs, and find the perfect tier for your needs.
Not sure if free is enough? See our Free vs Paid comparison →
Still deciding? Read our full verdict on whether AgentEval is worth it →
mo
mo
Pricing sourced from AgentEval · Last verified March 2026
No. AgentEval is built exclusively for .NET and ships on NuGet (nuget.org/packages/AgentEval). Python teams should use DeepEval, PromptFoo, or LangSmith for equivalent AI agent evaluation capabilities. Based on our analysis of 870+ AI tools, AgentEval is one of the only mature agent evaluation frameworks targeting the Microsoft/.NET ecosystem specifically, which is precisely its positioning.
Yes. Any .NET agent that implements IChatClient can be tested via the IChatClient.AsEvaluableAgent() one-liner extension method. A Semantic Kernel bridge is also included for SK-based agents. This cross-framework design means you are not locked into MAF, though MAF is where the deepest integration exists with automatic tool call tracking and token/cost telemetry.
DeepEval and RAGAS are Python frameworks with larger communities and broader metric catalogs. AgentEval is their .NET counterpart, offering equivalent coverage for RAG metrics (Faithfulness, Relevance, Context Precision/Recall), plus unique additions like the 192-probe Red Team module and fluent tool-chain assertions. Choose based on language ecosystem — AgentEval for C#/.NET shops, DeepEval/RAGAS for Python. All three are open source.
It scales with repetition count: 100 tests × 50 repetitions equals 5,000 LLM calls, roughly $15–$30 per test suite at GPT-4 pricing. AgentEval's recommended pattern is to use live stochastic evaluation only for new scenarios and switch to trace record/replay for regression testing in CI, which eliminates API costs entirely. The comparer's RunsPerModel option (typically 5) gives statistical stability without runaway cost.
The Red Team module runs 192 attack probes across 9 attack types: Prompt Injection, Jailbreaks, PII Leakage, System Prompt Extraction, Indirect Injection, Excessive Agency, Insecure Output Handling, API Abuse, and Encoding Evasion. This covers 6 of the OWASP LLM Top 10 2025 vulnerabilities (60% coverage) with MITRE ATLAS technique mapping, and results can be exported directly to PDF for compliance reporting via result.ExportAsync("security-report.pdf", ExportFormat.Pdf).
AI builders and operators use AgentEval to streamline their workflow.
Try AgentEval Now →DeepEval: Open-source LLM evaluation framework with 50+ research-backed metrics including hallucination detection, tool use correctness, and conversational quality. Pytest-style testing for AI agents with CI/CD integration.
Compare Pricing →LangSmith lets you trace, analyze, and evaluate LLM applications and agents with deep observability into every model call, chain step, and tool invocation.
Compare Pricing →Open-source LLM testing and evaluation framework for systematically testing prompts, models, and AI agent behaviors with automated red-teaming.
Compare Pricing →