Choosing an agent framework integration

This table describes integration shapes, not a ranking or a promise that every adapter exposes every memory method. The linked guides own dependency ranges and setup details. In particular, the maintained LangChain adapter uses BaseChatMessageHistory and middleware; the old BaseMemory recipe is not the supported 1.x path. The Microsoft Agent Framework integration guide documents its own supported version range.

An existing framework is a useful starting point: keeping its message and execution abstractions reduces conversion work. For a new application, compare how each adapter fits the work you need to do:

The application still decides what retrieved material enters the prompt. Exposing a memory tool does not guarantee that a model will call it.

The short-term, long-term, and reasoning layers describe different records. An adapter may expose one layer directly and use another through the underlying client. Trace helpers must be connected to an application’s execution path; their existence does not make every agent run automatically observable.

Backend support is a separate question. Python supports Bolt and NAMS; TypeScript targets NAMS REST. Shared concepts do not imply identical operations or result shapes. Consult Backend capabilities and Bolt and NAMS before choosing an adapter around preferences, graph writes, extraction, or user scoping.

Framework extras install the dependencies declared for that adapter. The model provider and application framework may require additional packages. Installing a broad extra is not a substitute for the selected guide’s prerequisites.

Use the Python integration guides or TypeScript integration overview for installation commands and supported versions. Test counts are not a compatibility contract.

Context retrieval selects stored material relevant to the current task. Message storage persists an exchange. Search finds records by the supported semantic, property, or scope filters. These are distinct operations even when middleware combines them.

A useful integration design makes the actor explicit: an application invokes a client, framework middleware runs a hook, or a model chooses a tool. It also identifies where identifiers come from and whether a new process can reopen the same conversation. See the linked integration guide for method signatures and an executable path.

An asynchronous interface lets an application await I/O without blocking its event loop. A synchronous bridge has different lifecycle constraints. Neither style alone establishes a throughput ranking: database latency, retrieval size, extraction work, model calls, and concurrency also matter.

On Bolt, embedding and extraction settings affect client-side work. On NAMS, those operations are managed by the service. Measure the configured path on representative conversations, including a failed agent/tool turn, rather than assuming every adapter accepts the same tuning flags.

Keeping the same compatible backend can preserve stored records while an application changes frameworks. The application must still carry forward the correct workspace, conversation IDs, user filters where supported, and message-role conversions. A new client object or a repeated user name does not automatically resume a prior conversation.

Follow Migrate to NAMS for a backend change. For a framework change, use the destination integration guide and verify storage followed by retrieval from a fresh client before replacing an existing path.

Assign one owner to each write. If application code and middleware both persist a turn, the same exchange can be recorded twice. Keep retrieval scope explicit and pass only the context needed for the agent’s task.

Multiple agents may share a graph while using separate conversations. That is a coordination choice, not an access-control guarantee. Cross-agent sharing explains the distinction.

Import failures usually concern the installed framework/provider packages or the version range. Lifecycle failures concern when a hook runs and which event loop owns an asynchronous client. Empty search results concern stored data, embeddings, query thresholds, or scope.

Use the relevant integration guide’s troubleshooting and verification steps to isolate these layers. Changing the framework does not correct a backend capability mismatch.