Redefynd Technology RadarRedefynd Technology Radar
Trial

LiteLLM is a unified proxy for multiple LLM providers that we're evaluating to simplify model switching, reduce costs, and provide consistent APIs across different AI agent implementations.

Why we're trialing LiteLLM:

  • Unified API: Single interface for OpenAI, Anthropic, Azure OpenAI, and local models
  • Cost Optimization: Automatic model routing based on cost and performance
  • Fallback Handling: Graceful degradation when primary models are unavailable
  • Rate Limit Management: Intelligent request distribution across model providers
  • Token Tracking: Centralized usage monitoring and cost attribution

Key capabilities for agent systems:

  • Model Abstraction: Agents can switch models without code changes
  • Load Balancing: Distribute requests across multiple model endpoints
  • Caching: Response caching to reduce redundant API calls and costs
  • Request Routing: Route requests based on agent requirements and model capabilities
  • Retry Logic: Automatic retries with exponential backoff for failed requests

Cost optimization features:

  • Smart Routing: Choose cheapest model that meets quality requirements
  • Request Batching: Combine multiple agent requests for efficiency
  • Usage Analytics: Detailed cost breakdown by agent, model, and use case
  • Budget Controls: Set spending limits per agent or customer
  • Token Optimization: Track and optimize token usage patterns

Integration potential:

  • Kubernetes Deployment: Run as sidecar or dedicated service in our clusters
  • External Secrets: Secure management of multiple provider API keys
  • Prometheus Metrics: Export usage and performance metrics for monitoring
  • Service Mesh: Integrate with Istio for secure inter-service communication
  • Agent Frameworks: Drop-in replacement for direct LLM API calls

Evaluation focus:

  • Latency Impact: Overhead compared to direct API calls
  • Reliability: Failure handling and uptime characteristics
  • Model Coverage: Support for all models we need for different agent types
  • Configuration Management: Ease of managing routing rules and policies
  • Observability: Quality of metrics, logging, and debugging capabilities

Use cases being tested:

  • Multi-model agents: Agents that can use different models for different tasks
  • Cost-sensitive workflows: Background processing with cheaper models
  • High-availability agents: Critical agents with multi-provider fallback
  • Experimentation: A/B testing different models for agent performance