Agentic Index
Decagon vs Lorikeet (2026)
Both are enterprise support agents and Lorikeet is the specialist. That verdict is the Agentic Index coverage score, graded from each vendor's own published materials.
Lorikeet is built for regulated fintech and healthtech, running multi step actions across chat, email, voice and SMS with full quality assurance and audit on every conversation, at roughly 80 cents per resolution, documenting 11 of 14. Decagon is the generalist, purpose built for support with deep toolchain integration and quoted through sales, documenting 10 of 14 with stronger memory. If a regulator can ask why your agent said something, that question decides this.
This comparison is published by Agentic Index, an independent agentic AI vendor research platform. Decagon and Lorikeet are each graded against the same 14 capability Agentic Index taxonomy, from the vendor's own public materials under the Agentic Index verification standard, alongside 969 researched vendors. No vendor pays for placement and no vendor has reviewed this page. How this evidence is graded
Choose Decagon if
- You are not in a regulated vertical and do not need to pay for compliance depth you will not use.
- Memory across conversations is the capability you care about most.
- Toolchain integration depth is the requirement and you want it built to your stack.
Choose Lorikeet if
- You are in fintech or healthtech and audit coverage on every conversation is a requirement, not a feature.
- Full quality assurance and documented testing coverage will be examined during your own compliance review.
- Per resolution pricing near 80 cents lets you forecast cost against ticket volume.
| At a glance | Decagon | Lorikeet |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Customer support agent | Customer support agent |
| Entry price | Contact sales | ~$0.80/resolution (Scale: 48k/$48k yr) |
| Free / trial | n/p | — |
| Pricing confidence | contact only | public partial |
| Feature | D Decagon |
L Lorikeet |
|---|---|---|
| Action & orchestration | ||
|
Integrations & Tool Calling Ability to connect agents to real systems through native integrations, OAuth-authenticated actions, custom tools, APIs, webhooks, or MCP-compatible tools. |
Full / Explicit | Full / Explicit |
|
Workflow Orchestration Ability to sequence, branch, retry, route, and combine deterministic workflow nodes with autonomous agent steps. |
Full / Explicit | Full / Explicit |
|
Triggers & Channel Coverage How agents wake up and where they work: schedules, webhooks, message events, CRM events, inbox events, chat, email, voice, and collaboration tools. |
Full / Explicit | Full / Explicit |
| Knowledge & context | ||
|
Knowledge Grounding & RAG Ability to ground agent behavior in company data through document ingestion, retrieval, external knowledge APIs, semantic search, or RAG layers. |
Full / Explicit | Full / Explicit |
|
Memory & State Persistence Ability to persist context across a run, conversation, workflow, user, team, or longer-term memory layer. |
Full / Explicit | Partial |
| Control & trust | ||
|
Human Oversight & Guardrails Approval steps, consent checkpoints, escalation rules, structured guardrails, policy constraints, and pause/resume controls. |
Partial | Full / Explicit |
|
Security, Identity & Governance RBAC, SSO, auditability, encryption, least-privilege tool access, compliance posture, and data handling policy. |
Full / Explicit | Full / Explicit |
|
Observability & Auditability Traces, logs, execution histories, metrics, audit events, and debugging detail for production agent behavior. |
Full / Explicit | Full / Explicit |
|
Deployment & Data Residency Deployment modes and options, including SaaS, dedicated cloud, VPC, on-prem, hybrid, local runtime, and self-hosting. |
Partial | Full / Explicit |
| Solution readiness | ||
|
Prebuilt Agents, Templates & Packs Ready-made workflows, packaged employees, templates, blueprints, industry solutions, and role-specific agents that reduce time-to-value. |
No / Not documented | Partial |
| Platform extensibility | ||
|
Model Flexibility & Routing Ability to work across multiple foundation models, route tasks to different models, or let buyers bring their own providers and keys. |
Partial | Partial |
|
APIs, SDKs & MCP Extensibility Composability layer: stable APIs, SDKs, MCP tool consumption/serving, custom tools, and integration into internal systems. |
Partial | Partial |
|
Testing, Debugging & Optimization Testing, debugging, scoring, retries, fallbacks, quality gates, and optimization loops for improving agent workflows before and after deployment. |
Full / Explicit | Full / Explicit |
| Specialist automation | ||
|
Browser & Computer Use Browser, desktop, or remote/local computer control for workflows that cannot be handled through stable APIs alone. |
No / Not documented | No / Not documented |
Pricing snapshot
Sourced from the Index pricing dataset · open each vendor's profile for full detail.
| Pricing | D Decagon |
L Lorikeet |
|---|---|---|
|
Entry price Lowest public entry point |
Contact sales | ~$0.80/resolution (Scale: 48k/$48k yr) |
|
Pricing confidence How public the numbers are |
Contact only | Public, partial |
|
Billing Primary billing axis |
hybrid | resolutions |
|
Variable cost Workload / overage exposure |
High variable cost | Medium variable cost |
|
Free tier / trial Try before you buy |
No free tier
|
No free tier
|
|
Buying motion Self-serve vs sales call |
Sales call | Sales call |
More comparisons with Decagon or Lorikeet
Other matchups in customer support agents
Not the pairing you were after? These compare a different set of customer support agents on the same 14 capabilities.