Forum Widgets
Latest Discussions
URLs not accessible when running python script in sandbox
I have a script: import requests try: r = requests.get("https://google.com", timeout=10) print("Status:", r.status_code) print("Headers:", dict(r.headers)) print("Body:", r.text[:300]) except Exception as e: print(repr(e)) When I run it with an agent, it gives me this error: I have no idea how to make the URL valid for the conversation and it doesn't work with any URL I have provided so far.Microsoft Copilot for IT Administrators: The Complete Enterprise Deployment Guide
Artificial Intelligence has moved beyond being an experimental technology and has become an essential part of modern enterprise productivity. Among Microsoft’s AI-powered offerings, Microsoft Copilot stands out as one of the most transformative tools for businesses. It helps employees automate repetitive tasks, improve collaboration, generate content, analyse data, and make faster decisions using natural language. https://dellenny.com/microsoft-copilot-for-it-administrators-the-complete-enterprise-deployment-guide/
365 on iPhone cannot access work data
Microsoft 365 Copilot on iPhone recognizes that work data is connected. Enterprise Search can access my work content, and grounding works in Safari and on my other devices. However, Copilot Chat on this 1 phone does not return grounded results and behaves as if enterprise grounding is unavailable. Reinstalling, signing out/in, and resetting network settings did not resolve the issue.
Can Copilot help create development plan suggestions after a review?
After performance reviews, we want managers to turn feedback into practical development plans, but the quality is inconsistent. Some managers write clear next steps, others keep it very generic. Has anyone used Copilot or another AI workflow to suggest development actions based on review feedback, goals, or competencies? Could I build an agent specific to this? Could I create a subskill that standardizes this? Should I go for something third party?Copilot pain points....
Guys… seriously… we need some improvements here. I’m not asking Copilot to solve quantum physics or decode alien transmissions. I’m asking a Microsoft program for help with a Microsoft program. You’d think that would be the one scenario where Copilot would shine, right? Like, “Ah yes, my home turf, allow me to demonstrate competence.” But no. I can’t even get Copilot to correctly explain how to do basic SharePoint tasks. BASIC. As in, “click the thing, then click the other thing.” Instead I get a TED Talk about SharePoint philosophy and a guided meditation on patience. And then there’s the folder comparison fiasco. I want Copilot to do something so simple it should practically be a reflex: Compare two folders on my hard drive and tell me if they’re identical. Copilot’s response? “Absolutely, I can do that!” Followed immediately by an ever‑expanding scavenger hunt of things I apparently need to do first. It’s like asking someone to hand you a screwdriver and they say, “Sure, but first you’ll need to assemble this IKEA shelving unit, install three dependencies, sacrifice a goat, and agree to a quest.” I’m glad to hear you’re merging all the copilots into one “super Copilot.” Great idea. Fantastic. But let’s be honest — I’m praying the one that survives is the personal Copilot, because Copilot 365… whew. That thing feels like it was built by a committee that communicates exclusively through interpretive dance. And don’t even get me started on the wrapper versions. Those are like Copilot wearing a Halloween costume of itself, but the costume is made of cardboard and disappointment. And by the way — I’m STILL waiting for Copilot to create an app or program that automatically files my Outlook emails into folders. This is not a moon landing. This is not a Mars rover. This is not a Nobel Prize category. This is a simple, everyday, normal-person task. Yet somehow Copilot treats it like I’ve asked it to build the next Windows release from scratch using only a spoon and positive thinking. Come on, guys. We love the vision. We love the potential. But the basics need to work before the magic tricks do.
Microsoft's Copilot: A Frustrating Flop in AI-Powered Productivity
Microsoft's Copilot was supposed to be the game-changer in productivity, but it's quickly proving to be a massive disappointment. The idea was simple: integrate AI directly into Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and other Office tools to make our lives easier. But when it comes to actually performing specific functions, Copilot falls flat. Here’s the problem: when you ask Copilot to alter a document, modify an Excel file, or adjust a PowerPoint presentation, it’s practically useless. Instead of performing the tasks as requested, it often leaves you hanging with vague suggestions or instructions. Users don't want to be told how to perform a task—they want it done. This is what an AI assistant should do: execute commands efficiently, not just offer advice. What makes this even more frustrating is that other AI tools, like ChatGPT, can handle these tasks effortlessly. When you ask ChatGPT to perform a specific function, it does so without hesitation. It’s able to understand the request and deliver exactly what’s needed. But Copilot? It struggles with the basics, and that’s unacceptable, especially from a company like Microsoft. It’s frankly embarrassing that Microsoft can’t get this right. The whole point of integrating AI into these tools was to streamline workflows and boost productivity. But if Copilot can’t even manage simple tasks like formatting a document or adjusting a spreadsheet, then what’s the point? Users don’t need another tool that tells them how to do something—they need one that does it for them. Microsoft, you’ve missed the mark with Copilot. It's not just a minor inconvenience; it's a serious flaw that undermines the value of your Office suite. When other AI tools can easily accomplish what Copilot can't, it's time to reevaluate. Users expect more, and frankly, they deserve more for their investment. What’s been your experience with Copilot? Is anyone else finding it as frustrating as I am? Let’s talk about it.Custom Skills in Copilot Cowork
Skills are specialized instruction sets that tell Copilot Cowork exactly how to think, act, and respond for a specific task. There are two types: Out-of-the-box skills – built and maintained by Microsoft and Anthropic, automatically invoked based on conversation context (~13 available currently) Custom skills – instruction sets you write yourself, defining a specific process, format, and set of standards for Cowork to follow every time the skill is triggered Custom skills are really where Cowork starts to feel less like a generic assistant and more like a tool built around how you actually work. Once a skill is defined, Cowork applies the same process, format, and standards every time it's triggered, so you're not re-explaining your requirements in every conversation. For an in-depth tutorial on how to leverage skills in Copilot Cowork, check out the video below 👇 https://youtu.be/MnJmzZvqjJA
Feedback: Loop, To Do, and Copilot/Work IQ Have Fundamental Data-Discoverability Gaps
**Category:** Microsoft Loop / Microsoft To Do / Microsoft 365 Copilot (Work IQ) **Summary:** A day-long, hands-on investigation (creating, sharing, and re-locating the same task list through multiple M365 surfaces) surfaced several structural issues that prevent Copilot from reliably grounding on a user's own daily task content — even when using Microsoft's own recommended tools. Posting this as consolidated feedback rather than separate one-off tickets because the issues share a common root cause: **fragmented storage architecture that isn't transparent to end users, and inconsistent Copilot/Work IQ coverage across first-party productivity apps.** --- ## 1. Loop "My workspace" content is invisible to Copilot/Search — and there's no UI signal telling users this When a Loop page/component is created directly in the Loop app (loop.cloud.microsoft), specifically in **My workspace**, it is stored in a user-owned **SharePoint Embedded container** (internally referenced as `CSP_...` in URLs). This container: - Has no site interface and is **not surfaced in standard SharePoint/Graph search** by default (confirmed via Microsoft's own SharePoint Embedded dev docs: *"SPE content is in the SharePoint index but not surfaced in standard SharePoint searching"*). - Is **not listed** in Work IQ's documented "Supported functionality" (Email, Meetings, OneDrive/SharePoint documents, Teams messages, Planner plans, Enterprise search — no mention of this container type). - Cannot be opened/read via Microsoft Graph search or Copilot grounding, regardless of how many times the content is re-shared via email or Teams link. **Reproduction:** Create a Loop page in My workspace → copy the page's share link → paste into an email or Teams message → send to yourself. The email/message is indexed and searchable, but the **linked Loop content is not** — Copilot can see that a link was shared, but cannot read what's on the other end. **Why this matters:** Users have no way to know, from the UI, whether the Loop content they just created lives in an indexable location or a hidden one. The same "Loop Components" button behaves completely differently depending on entry point (see #2). --- ## 2. The exact same UI action ("Loop Components" button / sharing a component) produces content in *different, non-obvious storage backends* depending on where it's triggered Through direct testing, the following was observed: | Creation path | Resulting storage | Discoverable by Copilot/Search? | | Loop app → My workspace → new page | SharePoint Embedded (`CSP_...` container) | ❌ No | | Loop app → page → convert element to "Component" → copy link → paste in email | Still the same `CSP_...` container | ❌ No | | **Teams chat** → Loop Components button → new component → send | OneDrive ("Microsoft Teams Chat Files" folder) | ✅ Yes | | Loop component shared as `-my.sharepoint.com/personal/...` link | Personal OneDrive | ✅ Yes | There is **no visual indicator** in the Loop or Teams UI that distinguishes these two families of storage. A user cannot tell, by looking at a component, whether it will ever be indexed. This makes "where should I put my recurring task tracker" an genuinely difficult, undocumented question for end users — we had to reverse-engineer the answer by inspecting URL domains across multiple test messages. **Ask:** Either (a) unify storage so all Loop content is indexable by default, or (b) add a visible badge/tooltip in the Loop UI indicating "this content is stored in your personal workspace and won't be searchable/Copilot-discoverable outside this page" vs. "this content is in a shared, indexable location." --- ## 3. Loop "add to workspace" appears to create a shortcut, not a true move — ownership stays with the original creator/location Adding an existing Loop component to a different (e.g., team) workspace generated a `.url` shortcut file rather than relocating the actual `.loop` file. The original file's location (and therefore its retention/discoverability characteristics) did not change. This isn't clearly communicated in the product — "add to workspace" reads like the content now *belongs* to that workspace. --- ## 4. Retention/discoverability interplay between Teams chat cleanup policies and Loop files needs clearer documentation Per Microsoft's own retention docs, Teams message retention policies explicitly **exclude** files ("Emails and files that you use with Teams aren't included in retention policies for Teams"), and Loop files created in Teams chat land in the auto-generated "Microsoft Teams Chat Files" OneDrive folder, which does **not** appear on the list of folders with built-in expiration (unlike "Microsoft Copilot Chat Files," which auto-deletes after 30 days). This is good news for users worried about losing content when chats are periodically cleared — but it is **not documented anywhere user-facing**, and users are left to guess (or ask a forum) whether their task tracker will survive a chat retention sweep. **Ask:** Add a plain-language note to Loop/Teams documentation clarifying that Loop files persist independently of chat message retention, unless a tenant admin has separately applied a retention label to that specific OneDrive folder. --- ## 5. Microsoft To Do is officially recommended for "individual tasks" but is **not included in Work IQ's supported data sources** Microsoft's own guidance says: *"To work on individual tasks... start with To Do."* However, Work IQ's documented supported functionality list (Email, Meetings/calendar, OneDrive/SharePoint docs, Teams messages, People, **Microsoft Planner plans**, Enterprise search) explicitly names Planner but **omits To Do entirely**. This means: - Copilot Chat cannot answer "what's on my To Do list today" — it has no grounding access to To Do task data at all. - The only path to integrate To Do with an agent is a custom-built Graph API plugin (`/me/todo/lists`), which requires developer effort most end users can't do themselves. - Multiple community threads (Tech Community, 2025–2026) confirm this gap has been raised repeatedly with no resolution: *"Doesn't look like Co-Pilot can natively interact with To Do just yet."* **Ask:** Add Microsoft To Do to Work IQ's supported data sources. This is the most basic, universally-needed personal productivity data source in the entire suite, and it's currently a blind spot for the product Microsoft itself recommends as the default answer for personal task tracking. --- ## 6. To Do's flagged-email task preview truncates mid-sentence with no way to see the rest without leaving the app When an email is flagged and appears in To Do's "Flagged email" list, the task detail pane shows a **truncated preview** of the email body — often cutting off mid-sentence at exactly the point where the actionable instruction is (e.g., "...we'll be looking for the item from" — no continuation). The only way to read the rest is to click "Open in Outlook" and leave the app entirely, defeating the purpose of a quick task-review pane. There is unused whitespace below the preview in the current UI, suggesting this is a low-effort truncation limit rather than a real space constraint. This has been raised in the Microsoft Community forum since **January 2024** with zero replies/action: *"Having to open each email in a separate window is highly inefficient... Ideally, the email preview should take up whatever space remains in that righthand column."* **Ask:** Either expand the preview pane to show full email body (space is clearly available), or make it resizable/scrollable so users aren't forced to leave the app to read one more sentence. --- ## 7. Overall: four overlapping personal/team task tools (To Do, Planner, Loop task lists, Teams Tasks app) with unclear, undocumented boundaries and uneven Copilot support Each tool markets itself as suitable for slightly different scenarios, but: - Sync between Loop task components and Planner reportedly creates a **new Plan per Loop component** rather than linking to an existing one — a bug/limitation raised on Tech Community since at least Oct 2025, still unresolved as of mid-2026, and explicitly called out by a commenter as something that "should have been a release blocker." - "Add to Microsoft To Do" from Teams Copilot meeting recap action items has been intermittently available/unavailable, per community reports, with no clear roadmap status. - None of this is explained in a single, current, authoritative "which tool for which scenario, and what's the Copilot support level for each" reference. **Ask:** Publish (and keep updated) a single official comparison page that includes not just feature differences between To Do/Planner/Loop/Teams Tasks, but explicitly states **Copilot/Work IQ grounding support level** for each, so users can make an informed choice up front instead of discovering gaps through trial and error. --- ## Why this matters Individually, each of these is a minor rough edge. Together, they mean that a fairly universal, basic task — "let Copilot help me track and recall my daily to-do list" — currently has **no reliable, fully-supported path** using only first-party Microsoft tools, despite Microsoft actively promoting an "AI-native," Copilot-everywhere vision across the 450M-seat M365 install base. A technically proficient user (myself) needed roughly a full day of trial-and-error, URL-inspection, and cross-referencing public docs to arrive at a partial workaround. That is not a reasonable bar for the average user, and it undercuts trust in Copilot's promise of "ask me anything about your work." Happy to provide full repro steps, screenshots, or file/URL samples (redacted) if useful for triage.Error Exporting Solution - Copilot Studio Agent with Confluence MCP “search” Tool
Hi all, I'm running into an issue when trying to export a solution that contains an agent built in Copilot Studio using the Confluence MCP “search” tool (Rovo search). I’m hoping someone can help clarify whether additional steps are required, or if this is a product limitation/bug. Scenario I’m building an agent that uses the Confluence MCP connector, specifically the Rovo “search” tool, combined with agent instructions to filter a specific Confluence space. Everything works fine in my developer environment, and now I’m preparing to move the solution to QA. However, I'm blocked at the export step. Steps I Followed Created the agent Added and configured Confluence MCP Selected only the “search” tool Set up agent instructions Created a new solution Added the agent to the solution Exported the solution Received the following error: Solution "xxxxxx" failed to export: Exporting connection reference <masked_connection_reference_id> for a custom connector requires the custom connector to be added to a Dataverse solution. Please add connector <masked_connector_id> to a solution and retry. What I Already Checked When I added the agent to the solution, only the Connection References were added automatically — no Custom Connectors were included. So, I manually added the Confluence MCP Custom Connector to the solution. Despite doing so, the export still fails with the same error. Additional Observations If I create a similar agent that uses only the searchConfluenceUsingCql tool (not the Rovo “search” tool), the solution exports without issues and I can successfully import it into QA. This makes me suspect that the problem is specific to the Rovo “search” capability in the MCP. Question Has anyone encountered this before? Do different steps need to be followed when an agent uses the Rovo “search” tool in the Confluence MCP? Or could it be a known issue? Any guidance or workarounds would be greatly appreciated. Thank youuu!"Sorry, this conversation has reached its limit. Let's start a new chat."
Hi All, We're currently using Copilot for Microsoft 365 in our business and I'm finding it incredibly annoying when Copilot tells me this. "Sorry, this conversation has reached its limit. Let's start a new chat." When I asked Copilot why, this is what I receive. "The message “Sorry, this conversation has reached its limit. Let’s start a new chat.” means that the current conversation has reached the maximum number of turns or messages allowed. Each conversation with me, Copilot Pro, has a limit on the number of turns it can take. Once this limit is reached, the conversation cannot continue further in the same thread. Starting a new chat will initiate a new conversation where you can continue to ask questions or request assistance. This is a measure to ensure optimal performance and user experience. I hope this clarifies your query! 😊" When I asked Copilot what the limit is, this is what I receive. "I’m sorry, but I can’t provide the exact number of turns or messages allowed in a conversation. The limit is set to ensure optimal performance and user experience. However, once the limit is reached, you can always start a new conversation. Please let me know if there’s anything else I can assist you with! 😊" I'd love to understand the logic for such a limitation. Can anyone kindly explain this is plain simple English please? Thanks! Cheers, Eddie | Zhamatix
