agent-governance-toolkit vs agentic_security

agent-governance-toolkit is much bigger: 6.2k stars against 2.0k. Over the days we have tracked them agent-governance-toolkit moved +51.2% and agentic_security +4.7%, so agent-governance-toolkit is growing faster right now.

Neither one leads on the six capability axes, so the choice comes down to which of them fits the way you already work.

Stars and commit dates come from our own daily tracking. The six axes are read off each project's documentation by our review pipeline, so they describe what a project says about itself, not what we measured in its code.

Where they stand today

Deterministic, application-level enforcement that intercepts every tool call and makes denied actions structurally impossible (fail-closed governance plus tamper-evident audit), rather than relying on prompt-level controls.

Stars
6.2k
Tracked growth
+51.2%
Maturity
Last commit
1d ago
Language
Python
License
MIT
Cost to run
Free, open-source

Agentic Security focuses on agent/workflow-focused, multimodal (text, image, audio) and multi-step attack/fuzzing capabilities (including RL-based and dataset mutation approaches) to evaluate LLM vulnerabilities beyond single-shot prompt tests.

Stars
2.0k
Tracked growth
+4.7%
Maturity
Last commit
3d ago
Language
Python
License
Apache-2.0
Cost to run
Your LLM API key, usage billed by the provider
0%+51%90 tracked days
microsoft/agent-governance-toolkitmsoedov/agentic_security

Six axes, head to head

Each axis runs 0 to 5. The label under a score is what that project's own docs claim, not a category average.

Axisagent-governance-toolkitagentic_security
Context depth
How much of your codebase it sees before it answers: the open diff, the diff plus related files, or the whole repository.
Action-level only
Prompt-only
Noise control
How it keeps output volume down — severity thresholds, deduplication, incremental runs over new commits only.
Approval gating
Thresholds/config
Customization
How far it bends to your team: custom rules, prompts, style guides, per-path config.
YAML & APIs
Config + modules
Privacy
Whether your code stays on your own infrastructure: fully local, self-hostable, or cloud API only.
Fully local runnable
Self-hostable
Model freedom
Whether you can point it at any provider, or it is wired to one.
Bring-your-own key
Bring-your-own-key
Setup ease
What it takes to get a first useful run out of it.
One-command start
One-command start

Which one to pick

Pick agent-governance-toolkit if…

Deterministic enforcement — pick AGT when you need fail-closed, application-level policy enforcement and tamper-evident auditing that prevents agents from performing denied actions.

Runs in pr-bot, github-action, ci, cli, ide, coding-agent-plugin, web-app. Works with byok.

Pick agentic_security if…

Easy setup — pip-installable and runnable locally with configurable datasets and modules to quickly run multimodal, multi-step vulnerability scans against your LLM endpoints.

Runs in github-action, ci, cli, web-app. Works with byok, openai.

What people want from each one

Questions people ask

Is agent-governance-toolkit better than agentic_security?

Neither one leads on the six capability axes, so the choice comes down to which of them fits the way you already work. agent-governance-toolkit is worth picking when deterministic enforcement — pick AGT when you need fail-closed, application-level policy enforcement and tamper-evident auditing that prevents agents from performing denied actions.

Which of agent-governance-toolkit and agentic_security keeps my code private?

agent-governance-toolkit: Fully local runnable (5/5). agentic_security: Self-hostable (4/5).

What does each one cost to run?

agent-governance-toolkit: Free, open-source. agentic_security: Your LLM API key, usage billed by the provider.

Full profiles: microsoft/agent-governance-toolkit and msoedov/agentic_security. Everything else in Security & guardrails.