Skip to main content

RunLedger

CI PyPI License

Website: https://runledger.io

Deterministic CI regression checks for tool-using agents. Record tool calls once, replay in CI, and fail PRs on mismatches, contract violations, or budget regressions.

RunLedger is a CI harness, not an "eval metrics framework":

  • DeepEval-style tools help you score behavior.
  • RunLedger helps you ship safely by making agent tests deterministic and merge-gated.

Try it now (60 seconds)

pipx install runledger
runledger init
runledger run ./evals/demo --mode replay --baseline baselines/demo.json

Integrations (merged)

Why RunLedger (in one minute)

The problem

Agents regress silently. Standard unit tests can't catch:

  • prompt drift that breaks tool schemas
  • hallucinated tool arguments
  • latency spikes or budget overruns
  • flaky external APIs causing false negatives in CI

The solution

RunLedger stops regressions by shifting from "vibes-based" evaluation to deterministic contracts:

  • Record & replay: record tool outputs once; replay them in CI for instant, stable tests.
  • Strict contracts: enforce tool schemas, calling order, and allowlists.
  • Budget gating: fail PRs automatically if wall time, tool-call count, or tool errors exceed defined limits.

RunLedger vs evaluation frameworks

Feature DeepEval / Ragas / TruLens RunLedger
Primary goal Scoring quality ("Is this answer helpful?") Shipping safely ("Did we break the build?")
Tool execution Often live or mocked manually Record/replay cassettes (automatic mocking)
Pass/fail criteria LLM-graded scores (0.0 - 1.0) Hard contracts (schema, budgets, order)
Best for Improving prompt quality Preventing regressions in production

Note: you can use both. Use DeepEval to calculate scores, and wrap your agent in RunLedger to ensure it runs deterministically in CI.


What it looks like in a PR

PR blocked (checks fail): PR blocked

Why it failed (RunLedger output): Failure reason

Artifacts are written to runledger_out/<suite>/<run_id>/:

  • report.html, summary.json, junit.xml, run.jsonl

FAQ: Why not just use DeepEval?

DeepEval is excellent for evaluation metrics and benchmarking. RunLedger is focused on CI determinism for tool-using agents:

  • Record tool calls once -> replay in CI (stable, fast, no flaky external dependencies)
  • Merge gates based on hard contracts (schema/tool/budgets), not "LLM-judge vibes"
  • Baselines-as-code (diffs + promotions) that fit cleanly into PR workflows

If you already use DeepEval, keep it - RunLedger can be the harness that makes agent tests CI-grade.


When to use RunLedger vs DeepEval

Use RunLedger when you need:

  • deterministic CI for tool-using agents (web/APIs/DBs)
  • hard pass/fail contracts (schema/tool order/budgets)
  • baselines + PR regression gates

Use DeepEval when you need:

  • rich evaluation metrics / model-graded scoring / benchmarking workflows

Use both if you want DeepEval scoring inside a deterministic CI harness.


How it works

  1. You define a suite (suite.yaml) and cases (cases/*.yaml).

  2. The runner launches your agent under test as a subprocess (any language).

  3. The agent requests tools via a stdio JSON protocol.

  4. The runner either:

    • records tool results to a cassette (local/dev), or
    • replays tool results from a cassette (CI/deterministic).
  5. The agent emits a final JSON output.

  6. The runner applies assertions + budgets, compares to a baseline, writes artifacts, and exits non-zero on regressions.


Agent-under-test protocol (language-agnostic)

Transport: newline-delimited JSON messages over stdin/stdout.

Hard rule: agent must write protocol JSON only to stdout. Any human logs must go to stderr (stdout must stay parseable).

Runner -> Agent

task_start

{ "type": "task_start", "task_id": "t1", "input": { "...": "..." } }

tool_result

{ "type": "tool_result", "call_id": "c1", "ok": true, "result": { "...": "..." } }

Agent -> Runner

tool_call

{ "type": "tool_call", "name": "search_docs", "call_id": "c1", "args": { "q": "..." } }

final_output (must be JSON)

{ "type": "final_output", "output": { "category": "billing", "reply": "..." } }

Optional:

  • log (structured debug)
  • task_error (explicit failure)

Eval suite format

evals/<suite>/suite.yaml (example)

suite_name: support-triage
agent_command: ["python", "agent.py"]
mode: replay            # replay | record | live
cases_path: cases
tool_registry:
  - search_docs
  - create_issue

assertions:
  - type: json_schema
    schema_path: schema.json

budgets:
  max_wall_ms: 20000
  max_tool_calls: 10
  max_tool_errors: 0

baseline_path: baselines/support-triage.json

evals/<suite>/cases/t1.yaml (example)

id: t1
description: "triage a login ticket"
input:
  ticket: "User cannot login"
  context:
    plan: "pro"
cassette: cassettes/t1.jsonl

assertions:
  - type: required_fields
    fields: ["category", "reply"]

budgets:
  max_wall_ms: 5000

Record/replay tool calls (cassettes)

Why record/replay?

Agents often depend on external tools (search, DB, HTTP). Live calls in CI are:

  • slow
  • flaky
  • non-deterministic
  • expensive

Instead:

  • record once (live tools) -> write cassette
  • replay in CI (deterministic) -> stable and fast

Cassette format (JSONL example)

Each line is one tool invocation:

{"tool":"search_docs","args":{"q":"reset password"},"ok":true,"result":{"hits":[...]}}
{"tool":"create_issue","args":{"title":"Login issue","priority":"p2"},"ok":true,"result":{"id":"ISSUE-123"}}

Replay matching (MVP):

  • exact match on tool + canonicalized args
  • if not found: the case fails with a clear "cassette mismatch" error

Assertions (deterministic)

MVP assertions:

  • json_schema (validate final output with JSON Schema)

  • required_fields (keys exist / basic typing)

  • regex / contains (for specific fields)

  • tool_contract:

    • must call tool X
    • must not call tool Y
    • X before Y (ordering)

Not default-gating (optional later):

  • LLM-judge scoring
  • semantic similarity scoring

Budgets (merge gates)

MVP budgets:

  • max_wall_ms
  • max_tool_calls
  • max_tool_errors

Not yet enforced (accepted in config, reported in artifacts when the agent sends metrics, but they do not fail a run today):

  • max_tokens_out
  • max_cost_usd

Baselines + regression checks

On each run, you can compare against a baseline and fail CI if:

  • success rate drops below threshold
  • average or p95 latency increases beyond allowed delta

Typical workflow:

  • record cassettes locally
  • establish a baseline from a known-good run
  • run replay mode on every PR and gate merges on regressions
runledger baseline promote --from runledger_out/<suite>/<run_id> --to baselines/<suite>.json
runledger run ./evals/<suite> --mode replay --baseline baselines/<suite>.json

Output artifacts

A run produces:

  • run.jsonl -- append-only event log (steps, tool calls/results, outputs)
  • summary.json -- suite + case metrics, pass/fail, regression summary
  • junit.xml -- CI-native pass/fail (each case maps to a test)
  • report.html -- static shareable report (no server required)

These files are intentionally stable so they can be:

  • diffed in PRs
  • uploaded as CI artifacts
  • ingested by a future hosted add-on

GitHub Actions (example)

name: agent-evals
on:
  pull_request:

jobs:
  evals:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - uses: actions/checkout@v4

      - name: Run deterministic evals (replay)
        uses: runledger/Runledger@v0.2
        with:
          path: ./evals/demo
          mode: replay

      - name: Upload eval artifacts
        uses: actions/upload-artifact@v4
        with:
          name: agent-eval-artifacts
          path: runledger_out/**

Determinism guide (rules of the road)

  • Prefer --mode replay in CI.
  • Ensure agent writes only JSONL protocol messages to stdout; logs go to stderr.
  • Canonicalize tool call args (stable key ordering, avoid volatile fields).
  • Avoid timestamps/randomness in final output; if needed, strip/normalize via normalization.
    normalization:
      strip_keys: ["timestamp", "request_id"]
      strip_paths: ["meta.seed"]
      replace_text:
        - pattern: "\\d{4}-\\d{2}-\\d{2}T\\d{2}:\\d{2}:\\d{2}Z"
          replacement: "<timestamp>"
    
  • Keep cassettes safe to commit: redact secrets by default.

Docs

  • docs/quickstart.md -- install + first run
  • docs/assertions.md -- assertions, tool contracts, budgets
  • docs/baselines.md -- baselines, diffing, promotion
  • docs/ci.md -- CI setup with GitHub Actions
  • docs/contracts.md -- public contracts (YAML, protocol, artifacts)
  • docs/troubleshooting.md -- common errors and fixes

Roadmap

  • init templates for Python (OpenAI SDK), LangGraph/LangChain, and Node/TS
  • richer budgets (tokens/cost) via optional task_metrics
  • PR comments bot for regression summaries
  • plugin system for custom assertions
  • HTML report trace viewer improvements

Commercial Support

RunLedger is MIT-licensed and free to self-host. For teams that want done-for-you implementation or ongoing maintenance, we offer:

  • Hardening Sprint (fixed-scope implementation to get deterministic CI running fast)
  • Assurance (monthly retainer for cassette and case updates, budget tuning, and incident response)

Contact: runledger.io/community.html#contact


Contributing

  • Issues and PRs welcome.
  • See CONTRIBUTING.md for development setup, style, and testing.
  • Security issues: see SECURITY.md.

License

MIT

Metadata

Release files for runledger 0.2.1

For a detailed explanation of source distributions (sdists) and built distributions (wheels), please see the package formats documentation.

Source distribution (sdist)

Source distribution for runledger 0.2.1
File Size Uploaded
runledger-0.2.1.tar.gz 41.8 kB Details

Built distribution (wheel)

Table of built distributions (wheels) for runledger 0.2.1
File Interpreter ABI Platform
runledger-0.2.1-py3-none-any.whl Python 3 none any Details

Total release size: 90.4 kB

Release files / runledger-0.2.1.tar.gz

Download URL runledger-0.2.1.tar.gz
Size 41.8 kB
Tags Source
SHA-256 checksum
How to use checksums
4fddcdbf0b629ddf290fba81526d2dadba49fb47b0293d57a9fb35abe11d68a5
BLAKE2b-256 checksum
How to use checksums
b3101cff47cab76009e519db5860c3d707ba2d7d92a9b2a7ee85054767026ccc
Upload date
Uploaded using Trusted Publishing?
What is trusted publishing?
Yes
Uploaded via twine/7.0.0 CPython/3.13.14

Provenance

Provenance describes where a file came from. On PyPI, provenance is shared via attestations, which provide a verifiable record of the build or publishing details. View details, limitations and caveats.

PyPI Publish Attestation

PyPI verified that this artifact, at this checksum, originated from the publisher listed below.

Signed by GitHub Actions, verified by PyPI on Sep 30, 2026.

Transparency log

Release files / runledger-0.2.1-py3-none-any.whl

Download URL runledger-0.2.1-py3-none-any.whl
Size 48.6 kB
Tags Python 3
SHA-256 checksum
How to use checksums
f53dea416470def39c1ebef5a4550778e7848ba56199b5875b887ae904a13f1a
BLAKE2b-256 checksum
How to use checksums
d119f5a0722fc1a8ac1b3a718d80053c9dc29ce613ee9e76d17c1293932eaebd
Upload date
Uploaded using Trusted Publishing?
What is trusted publishing?
Yes
Uploaded via twine/7.0.0 CPython/3.13.14

Provenance

Provenance describes where a file came from. On PyPI, provenance is shared via attestations, which provide a verifiable record of the build or publishing details. View details, limitations and caveats.

PyPI Publish Attestation

PyPI verified that this artifact, at this checksum, originated from the publisher listed below.

Signed by GitHub Actions, verified by PyPI on Sep 30, 2026.

Transparency log

Release history Release notifications | RSS feed

This release

0.2.1 This release

2 release files

0.2.0

2 release files

0.1.1

2 release files

0.1.0

2 release files

Anthropic, PBC Visionary sponsor Bloomberg Visionary sponsor Hudson River Trading Visionary sponsor Meta Visionary sponsor NVIDIA Visionary sponsor Microsoft Sustainability sponsor Depot Continuous Integration AWS Cloud computing and Security Sponsor Datadog Monitoring Fastly CDN Google Download Analytics Sentry Error logging StatusPage Status page