ComparePromptfooPyRIT
How SENTINEL fits in
There’s no single “best” tool. Promptfoo and PyRIT are great — SENTINEL aims to be a productized suite that makes red teaming repeatable, reportable, and easy to adopt.
| Feature | SENTINEL | Promptfoo | PyRIT |
|---|---|---|---|
| Primary use-case | Security + quality suite (modules, scoring, reports) | LLM evals + red teaming for apps (CLI + CI workflows) | Programmable red teaming framework for security researchers |
| Best fit | Product teams, security teams, auditors shipping an AI app | Developers validating prompts/models/RAG over time | Security professionals orchestrating custom attack workflows |
| Batteries included | Opinionated modules + attack library + UI patterns | Strong CLI + assertions + CI integration | Framework primitives (you assemble the playbooks) |
| Strength | Unified coverage across failure modes + actionable scoring | Developer ergonomics, benchmarking, regression testing | Flexibility + orchestration depth for red team exercises |
| Tradeoff | More “suite” surface area to maintain | More eval-focused than research-grade attack orchestration | Requires expertise and more glue code for end-to-end runs |
If you want
CI regression testing
Promptfoo shines when your goal is repeatable evaluation of prompts/models/RAG outputs across deployments.
If you want
Research-grade orchestration
PyRIT is a strong framework for security professionals building custom red team workflows and experimenting with attack techniques.
If you want
A unified product suite
SENTINEL focuses on adoption: a cohesive set of modules, consistent scoring, and an opinionated workflow that teams can standardize on.
Note
You can use them together
A realistic workflow is: Promptfoo for day-to-day evals + CI gates, PyRIT for deeper research exercises, and SENTINEL for a broader suite posture with reporting and module-level scoring.