Orchestration

Exogram vs LangChain

The most popular agent framework. Zero native governance.

What LangChain Does

  • LangChain provides chains, agents, tool abstractions, and the LangChain Expression Language (LCEL).
  • LangSmith adds observability — you can see what agents did after the fact.
  • No native execution governance. Tool calls execute directly against your systems.
  • The most popular agent framework in the ecosystem, used by thousands of production applications.

What Exogram Does

  • Exogram sits between LangChain's agent output and your tool execution.
  • Every tool call LangChain routes passes through Exogram's policy engine before reaching your systems.
  • LangSmith tells you what happened. Exogram prevents what shouldn't happen. Observability is not governance.
  • 2-line integration: wrap your tool execution with `exogram.evaluate()` — works with any LangChain agent.

Key Differences

DimensionLangChainExogram
Primary FunctionOrchestration + observabilityExecution governance
EnforcementNone (observe only)Deterministic (block/pass)
TimingPost-execution visibilityPre-execution validation
Latency AddedN/A (no governance)0.07ms per evaluation
IntegrationN/A2 lines of code

The Verdict

Use LangChain for orchestration. Use Exogram because observability is not governance. Seeing what an agent did doesn't undo the damage.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does Exogram replace LangChain?

No. They operate at different layers. LangChain orchestrates agent workflows. Exogram governs whether each action in that workflow is allowed to execute. You use both.

How do I integrate Exogram with LangChain?

Wrap your tool execution with exogram.evaluate(). Two lines of code. The Exogram quickstart page shows the exact integration diff.

Why doesn't LangSmith solve the governance problem?

LangSmith is observability — it shows you what agents did. Exogram is governance — it controls what agents can do. You can't undo a database deletion by looking at a trace log.