ANSWER HUB
RunLedger vs trulens
TruLens emphasizes evaluation and observability; RunLedger emphasizes deterministic replay and CI gates.
Direct Answer
Use RunLedger for deterministic replay and PR gating. Use TruLens for evaluation, scoring, and observability workflows.
Quick Decision
| Use RunLedger when | Consider alternatives when |
|---|---|
| You need deterministic CI gates. | You need evaluation dashboards and scoring. |
| Tool calls make CI flaky. | You want observability on live runs. |
| You want pass/fail contracts. | You want qualitative insights and monitoring. |
Where TruLens wins
- Observability and evaluation instrumentation.
- Quality scoring and feedback loops.
- Monitoring live or batch runs.
Where RunLedger wins
- Deterministic replay for tool-using agents.
- Hard CI gates on contracts, budgets, and baselines.
- PR-friendly artifacts and diffs.
Recommendation
Use TruLens for evaluation and monitoring, and RunLedger to enforce deterministic CI gates.
Tradeoffs
- Using both adds setup and maintenance.
- Evaluation tooling may add runtime cost.
- Deterministic replay still needs cassette upkeep.
When NOT to use RunLedger
Skip RunLedger if you only need observability and do not require deterministic CI gates.