Comparing Three Approaches to AI Agent Evaluation and Observability
Why evaluation and observability belong together Agent evaluation and observability answer two related questions: Is the agent producing the right result? What happened from the initial request through every model and tool call? Evaluation measures quality with repeatable scores (is our system working), such as task completion, tool-call accuracy, groundedness, or safety. Observability captures the end-to-end execution flow, including prompts, model responses, tool calls, latency, token usage, and errors. You need both. A score can tell you that an agent failed, while a trace helps you understand why. Microsoft provides several ways to host and monitor agents. You can use a Microsoft Foundry hosted agent with integrated tracing and evaluation, or run the agent independently on a service such as Azure Container Apps and connect it to Azure Monitor. Open-source platforms such as Langfuse provide another option and can be self-hosted in Azure. We built three proofs of concept (POCs) to compare these approaches: Self-hosted Langfuse A Microsoft Foundry hosted agent A standalone agent on Azure Container Apps The best choice depends on more than features. Authentication, networking, security boundaries, operational ownership, and the existing Azure architecture all affect the decision. Note These findings come from one controlled comparison, not a general performance benchmark. We used the same agent image, model deployment, prompt, tools, and synthetic test data in all three POCs. The common test The test agent summarized a synthetic portfolio. It had to call three deterministic tools in a fixed order: Load the dataset Validate its schema Compute the summary The expected answer was known in advance, which allowed us to evaluate both the final result and the tool trajectory. We also created a deterministic tool-call-accuracy score so we could compare how each platform stored and displayed the same custom metric. POC 1: Self-hosted Langfuse For the Langfuse POC, one private Azure virtual machine ran the agent and the Langfuse stack with Docker Compose. The deployment included Langfuse web and worker services, PostgreSQL, ClickHouse, Redis, MinIO, and an OpenTelemetry Collector. Azure Bastion provided private administrative access, and a managed identity retrieved secrets from Azure Key Vault. The main advantage was the integrated experience. Traces, scores, datasets, experiments, annotations, latency, token usage, and cost appeared in one application. We could move from the original prompt to each tool call, the final response, and the evaluation score without building a separate dashboard. That capability comes with operational responsibility. A production self-hosted deployment requires patching, scaling, backup, recovery, data retention, access control, and monitoring for the Langfuse services and their data stores. Choose this approach when a unified, open-source AI engineering platform and deployment control are higher priorities than minimizing platform operations. POC 2: Microsoft Foundry hosted agent For the Foundry POC, Microsoft Foundry hosted the agent from a pinned container image. Application Insights and Log Analytics stored the telemetry. We used Foundry's Traces experience for agent trajectories and added an Azure Workbook for custom evaluation metrics. Foundry provided the strongest Azure-native developer experience. Its trace view displayed model and tool activity as an agent trajectory, and its evaluation capabilities included built-in and custom evaluators. The underlying traces still flowed to Application Insights, where they could be queried and used in Azure Monitor visualizations. The tradeoff is architectural alignment. The application must fit the customer's Foundry account, identity, networking, and deployment model. Custom business metrics can also require additional emission and visualization work beyond the native evaluation experience. Choose this approach when managed agent hosting, Foundry-native tracing, and Azure-native evaluation are the priorities. POC 3: Standalone agent on Azure Container Apps For the third POC, we removed Foundry from the hosting path. The same image ran as an Azure Container App and used a managed identity to pull from Azure Container Registry and call Azure OpenAI. OpenTelemetry sent agent activity to Application Insights and Log Analytics. This POC demonstrated that the Azure Monitor foundation is not limited to Foundry-hosted agents. Application Insights still provided an end-to-end transaction waterfall showing model calls, tool executions, latency, and errors, along with agent-level monitoring views. The difference was the amount of assembly required. The team owns application instrumentation, the evaluation runner, custom metric emission, dashboards, and CI integration. The result offers more control over hosting, authentication, ingress, and network placement, but it requires more engineering than the Foundry-native experience. Choose this approach when the agent must fit an existing container platform or custom security architecture and the team is prepared to build the evaluation workflow around it. Side-by-side comparison Decision area Langfuse Foundry hosted agent Azure Container Apps Agent hosting Customer-operated in this POC Microsoft-managed hosted agent Customer-managed container app Primary trace experience Native Langfuse tracing Foundry Traces plus Application Insights Application Insights Evaluation Native scores, evaluators, datasets, and experiments Foundry built-in and custom evaluators Custom runner or separate evaluation service Custom metrics Native scores and dashboards Emit to Azure Monitor and visualize as needed Emit to Azure Monitor and visualize as needed Infrastructure ownership Highest Lowest for agent hosting Moderate Architecture flexibility High, but the platform must be operated Aligned to Foundry architecture Highest for the application hosting layer Best fit Integrated open-source AI engineering platform Managed Azure-native agent experience Existing container and security architecture What we learned All three approaches can support meaningful evaluation and observability. The real difference is where the capabilities live and how much the customer must assemble and operate. Langfuse provided the most integrated tracing and evaluation experience in this comparison, but we owned the platform infrastructure. Foundry reduced hosting operations and provided a purpose-built agent trace and evaluation experience. Azure Container Apps provided the greatest hosting flexibility while preserving Azure Monitor observability, but required us to supply the evaluation and custom visualization layers. Because all three POCs used the same model, prompt, and tool sequence, the LLM token cost for an equivalent run was effectively the same. Platform and infrastructure costs were not equivalent and require a separate estimate based on scale, retention, networking, support, and operational requirements. The decision should start with the customer's constraints: Does the agent fit the Foundry hosting and identity model? Does the organization want to operate an open-source observability platform? Does the agent need to run inside an existing container and network architecture? Which evaluation capabilities must be available before deployment and in production? Who will own instrumentation, dashboards, storage, upgrades, and incident response? There is no single correct platform for every agent. The right choice is the one that provides the required evidence about quality and behavior while fitting the customer's security, architecture, and operating model. Learn more Set up tracing for agents in Microsoft Foundry Monitor AI agents with Application Insights Review Microsoft Foundry agent evaluators Collect OpenTelemetry data in Azure Container Apps Explore Langfuse observability Explore Langfuse evaluation Deploy Langfuse on Azure
Safe Rollouts Start with Signals: Introducing Scorecards in Azure App Configuration
Applications are rarely changed all at once anymore. Teams use feature flags, targeting rules, and progressive rollout patterns to introduce changes gradually and reduce risk. This rollout model gives teams more than a safer way to control exposure. It also creates the context to understand what changed after a rollout. But teams still need a practical way to answer: Did this rollout move the needle in a measurable way? Today, we’re introducing Scorecards in Azure App Configuration in public preview. Scorecards are a new capability in the Feature Management that helps teams quickly identify which metrics were impacted by a feature rollout and use those signals to decide what to do next. Why Scorecards? After a controlled rollout, the next step is often manual unless you run a full-fledged experiment. Development Teams open dashboards, compare time ranges, scan logs, and look across standard and custom metrics to understand what changed. That work can take time, especially when an application emits many metrics across performance, reliability, engagement, business KPIs, or AI-related scenarios. Scorecards help narrow that investigation. Using the telemetry your application already sends to Application Insights, Scorecards surface the metrics that moved after a rollout. This gives teams a faster starting point without requiring them to manually scan large sets of telemetry first for signals How it works Scorecards build on Feature Management in Azure App Configuration and telemetry from Application Insights. A team starts by defining variants for a feature flag. One variant may represent the current behavior, while another represents a new feature, configuration path, service behavior, model version, or agent workflow. As the application runs, it continues to emit telemetry to Application Insights. This can include standard metrics such as requests, failures, dependencies, and duration, along with custom metrics logged by the application. Scorecards help teams view telemetry through the context of a rollout. In the telemetry experience for a feature flag, Scorecards surface the metrics associated with the rollout in two categories: Impacted Metrics showing statistically significant change after rollout. Inconclusive Metrics where there is no clear signal. When to use Scorecards Scorecards are useful when teams want a quick signal after a controlled rollout. Common examples include: application feature launches runtime configuration updates backend service changes performance improvements AI model or agent updates Teams can use Scorecards to compare feature variants against key performance indicators, detect potential issues introduced by updated feature behavior, evaluate adoption and usage trends, and use telemetry insights to guide rollout, optimization, or deprecation decisions. For deeper investigation, teams can continue using existing Application Insights dashboards, logs, alerts, and observability workflows. Example: validating a new experience Consider a team rolling out a redesigned onboarding flow in their application. The team enables the new experience for a small percentage of users using a feature flag variant. The application already emits telemetry for page load duration, failed requests, sign-up completion, and custom engagement events. After starting the rollout, Scorecards can help highlight which metrics show statistically significant change. If completion-related metrics appear under Impacted, the team has a clear signal to investigate further. If most operational metrics appear as Inconclusive, the team can avoid spending time on areas where no clear signal was detected. Architecture: From rollout to signal Getting started To use Scorecards: Use Azure App Configuration to implement feature flags in your application. Roll out changes using variant feature flags. Enable telemetry for the feature flag with Application Insights Use Scorecards in the Azure Portal to quickly identify impacted metrics. Scorecards help teams focus on the metrics most relevant to a rollout and make faster decisions with more confidence. We’d love to hear your feedback on what is working well and where we can improve as we continue to iterate on Scorecards and enhance the visual experience.An AI led SDLC: Building an End-to-End Agentic Software Development Lifecycle with Azure and GitHub.
This is due to the inevitable move towards fully agentic, end-to-end SDLCs. We may not yet be at a point where software engineers are managing fleets of agents creating the billion-dollar AI abstraction layer, but (as I will evidence in this article) we are certainly on the precipice of such a world. Before we dive into the reality of agentic development today, let me examine two very different modules from university and their relevance in an AI-first development environment. Manual Requirements Translation. At university I dedicated two whole years to a unit called “Systems Design”. This was one of my favourite units, primarily focused on requirements translation. Often, I would receive a scenario between “The Proprietor” and “The Proprietor’s wife”, who seemed to be in a never-ending cycle of new product ideas. These tasks would be analysed, broken down, manually refined, and then mapped to some kind of early-stage application architecture (potentially some pseudo-code and a UML diagram or two). The big intellectual effort in this exercise was taking human intention and turning it into something tangible to build from (BA’s). Today, by the time I have opened Notepad and started to decipher requirements, an agent can already have created a comprehensive list, a service blueprint, and a code scaffold to start the process (*cough* spec-kit *cough*). Manual debugging. Need I say any more? Old-school debugging with print()’s and breakpoints is dead. I spent countless hours learning to debug in a classroom and then later with my own software, stepping through execution line by line, reading through logs, and understanding what to look for; where correlation did and didn’t mean causation. I think back to my year at IBM as a fresh-faced intern in a cloud engineering team, where around 50% of my time was debugging different issues until it was sufficiently “narrowed down”, and then reading countless Stack Overflow posts figuring out the actual change I would need to make to a PowerShell script or Jenkins pipeline. Already in Azure, with the emergence of SRE agents, that debug process looks entirely different. The debug process for software even more so… #terminallastcommand WHY IS THIS NOT RUNNING? #terminallastcommand Review these logs and surface errors relating to XYZ. As I said: breakpoints are dead, for now at least. Caveat – Is this a good thing? One more deviation from the main core of the article if you would be so kind (if you are not as kind skip to the implementation walkthrough below). Is this actually a good thing? Is a software engineering degree now worthless? What if I love printf()? I don’t know is my answer today, at the start of 2026. Two things worry me: one theoretical and one very real. To start with the theoretical: today AI takes a significant amount of the “donkey work” away from developers. How does this impact cognitive load at both ends of the spectrum? The list that “donkey work” encapsulates is certainly growing. As a result, on one end of the spectrum humans are left with the complicated parts yet to be within an agent’s remit. This could have quite an impact on our ability to perform tasks. If we are constantly dealing with the complex and advanced, when do we have time to re-root ourselves in the foundations? Will we see an increase in developer burnout? How do technical people perform without the mundane or routine tasks? I often hear people who have been in the industry for years discuss how simple infrastructure, computing, development, etc. were 20 years ago, almost with a longing to return to a world where today’s zero trust, globally replicated architectures are a twinkle in an architect’s eye. Is constantly working on only the most complex problems a good thing? At the other end of the spectrum, what if the performance of AI tooling and agents outperforms our wildest expectations? Suddenly, AI tools and agents are picking up more and more of today’s complicated and advanced tasks. Will developers, architects, and organisations lose some ability to innovate? Fundamentally, we are not talking about artificial general intelligence when we say AI; we are talking about incredibly complex predictive models that can augment the existing ideas they are built upon but are not, in themselves, innovators. Put simply, in the words of Scott Hanselman: “Spicy auto-complete”. Does increased reliance on these agents in more and more of our business processes remove the opportunity for innovative ideas? For example, if agents were football managers, would we ever have graduated from Neil Warnock and Mick McCarthy football to Pep? Would every agent just augment a ‘lump it long and hope’ approach? We hear about learning loops, but can these learning loops evolve into “innovation loops?” Past the theoretical and the game of 20 questions, the very real concern I have is off the back of some data shared recently on Stack Overflow traffic. We can see in the diagram below that Stack Overflow traffic has dipped significantly since the release of GitHub Copilot in October 2021, and as the product has matured that trend has only accelerated. Data from 12 months ago suggests that Stack Overflow has lost 77% of new questions compared to 2022… Stack Overflow democratises access to problem-solving (I have to be careful not to talk in past tense here), but I will admit I cannot remember the last time I was reviewing Stack Overflow or furiously searching through solutions that are vaguely similar to my own issue. This causes some concern over the data available in the future to train models. Today, models can be grounded in real, tested scenarios built by developers in anger. What happens with this question drop when API schemas change, when the technology built for today is old and deprecated, and the dataset is stale and never returning to its peak? How do we mitigate this impact? There is potential for some closed-loop type continuous improvement in the future, but do we think this is a scalable solution? I am unsure. So, back to the question: “Is this a good thing?”. It’s great today; the long-term impacts are yet to be seen. If we think that AGI may never be achieved, or is at least a very distant horizon, then understanding the foundations of your technical discipline is still incredibly important. Developers will not only be the managers of their fleet of agents, but also the janitors mopping up the mess when there is an accident (albeit likely mopping with AI-augmented tooling). An AI First SDLC Today – The Reality Enough reflection and nostalgia (I don’t think that’s why you clicked the article), let’s start building something. For the rest of this article I will be building an AI-led, agent-powered software development lifecycle. The example I will be building is an AI-generated weather dashboard. It’s a simple example, but if agents can generate, test, deploy, observe, and evolve this application, it proves that today, and into the future, the process can likely scale to more complex domains. Let’s start with the entry point. The problem statement that we will build from. “As a user I want to view real time weather data for my city so that I can plan my day.” We will use this as the single input for our AI led SDLC. This is what we will pass to promptkit and watch our app and subsequent features built in front of our eyes. The goal is that we will: - Spec-kit to get going and move from textual idea to requirements and scaffold. - Use a coding agent to implement our plan. - A Quality agent to assess the output and quality of the code. - GitHub Actions that not only host the agents (Abstracted) but also handle the build and deployment. - An SRE agent proactively monitoring and opening issues automatically. The end to end flow that we will review through this article is the following: Step 1: Spec-driven development - Spec First, Code Second A big piece of realising an AI-led SDLC today relies on spec-driven development (SDD). One of the best summaries for SDD that I have seen is: “Version control for your thinking”. Instead of huge specs that are stale and buried in a knowledge repository somewhere, SDD looks to make them a first-class citizen within the SDLC. Architectural decisions, business logic, and intent can be captured and versioned as a product evolves; an executable artefact that evolves with the project. In 2025, GitHub released the open-source Spec Kit: a tool that enables the goal of placing a specification at the centre of the engineering process. Specs drive the implementation, checklists, and task breakdowns, steering an agent towards the end goal. This article from GitHub does a great job explaining the basics, so if you’d like to learn more it’s a great place to start (https://github.blog/ai-and-ml/generative-ai/spec-driven-development-with-ai-get-started-with-a-new-open-source-toolkit/). In short, Spec Kit generates requirements, a plan, and tasks to guide a coding agent through an iterative, structured development process. Through the Spec Kit constitution, organisational standards and tech-stack preferences are adhered to throughout each change. I did notice one (likely intentional) gap in functionality that would cement Spec Kit’s role in an autonomous SDLC. That gap is that the implement stage is designed to run within an IDE or client coding agent. You can now, in the IDE, toggle between task implementation locally or with an agent in the cloud. That is great but again it still requires you to drive through the IDE. Thinking about this in the context of an AI-led SDLC (where we are pushing tasks from Spec Kit to a coding agent outside of my own desktop), it was clear that a bridge was needed. As a result, I used Spec Kit to create the Spec-to-issue tool. This allows us to take the tasks and plan generated by Spec Kit, parse the important parts, and automatically create a GitHub issue, with the option to auto-assign the coding agent. From the perspective of an autonomous AI-led SDLC, Speckit really is the entry point that triggers the flow. How Speckit is surfaced to users will vary depending on the organisation and the context of the users. For the rest of this demo I use Spec Kit to create a weather app calling out to the OpenWeather API, and then add additional features with new specs. With one simple prompt of “/promptkit.specify “Application feature/idea/change” I suddenly had a really clear breakdown of the tasks and plan required to get to my desired end state while respecting the context and preferences I had previously set in my Spec Kit constitution. I had mentioned a desire for test driven development, that I required certain coverage and that all solutions were to be Azure Native. The real benefit here compared to prompting directly into the coding agent is that the breakdown of one large task into individual measurable small components that are clear and methodical improves the coding agents ability to perform them by a considerable degree. We can see an example below of not just creating a whole application but another spec to iterate on an existing application and add a feature. We can see the result of the spec creation, the issue in our github repo and most importantly for the next step, our coding agent, GitHub CoPilot has been assigned automatically. Step 2: GitHub Coding Agent - Iterative, autonomous software creation Talking of coding agents, GitHub Copilot’s coding agent is an autonom ous agent in GitHub that can take a scoped development task and work on it in the background using the repository’s context. It can make code changes and produce concrete outputs like commits and pull requests for a developer to review. The developer stays in control by reviewing, requesting changes, or taking over at any point. This does the heavy lifting in our AI-led SDLC. We have already seen great success with customers who have adopted the coding agent when it comes to carrying out menial tasks to save developers time. These coding agents can work in parallel to human developers and with each other. In our example we see that the coding agent creates a new branch for its changes, and creates a PR which it starts working on as it ticks off the various tasks generated in our spec. One huge positive of the coding agent that sets it apart from other similar solutions is the transparency in decision-making and actions taken. The monitoring and observability built directly into the feature means that the agent’s “thinking” is easily visible: the iterations and steps being taken can be viewed in full sequence in the Agents tab. Furthermore, the action that the agent is running is also transparently available to view in the Actions tab, meaning problems can be assessed very quickly. Once the coding agent is finished, it has run the required tests and, even in the case of a UI change, goes as far as calling the Playwright MCP server and screenshotting the change to showcase in the PR. We are then asked to review the change. In this demo, I also created a GitHub Action that is triggered when a PR review is requested: it creates the required resources in Azure and surfaces the (in this case) Azure Container Apps revision URL, making it even smoother for the human in the loop to evaluate the changes. Just like any normal PR, if changes are required comments can be left; when they are, the coding agent can pick them up and action what is needed. It’s also worth noting that for any manual intervention here, use of GitHub Codespaces would work very well to make minor changes or perform testing on an agent’s branch. We can even see the unit tests that have been specified in our spec how been executed by our coding agent. The pattern used here (Spec Kit -> coding agent) overcomes one of the biggest challenges we see with the coding agent. Unlike an IDE-based coding agent, the GitHub.com coding agent is left to its own iterations and implementation without input until the PR review. This can lead to subpar performance, especially compared to IDE agents which have constant input and interruption. The concise and considered breakdown generated from Spec Kit provides the structure and foundation for the agent to execute on; very little is left to interpretation for the coding agent. Step 3: GitHub Code Quality Review (Human in the loop with agent assistance.) GitHub Code Quality is a feature (currently in preview) that proactively identifies code quality risks and opportunities for enhancement both in PRs and through repository scans. These are surfaced within a PR and also in repo-level scoreboards. This means that PRs can now extend existing static code analysis: Copilot can action CodeQL, PMD, and ESLint scanning on top of the new, in-context code quality findings and autofixes. Furthermore, we receive a summary of the actual changes made. This can be used to assist the human in the loop in understanding what changes have been made and whether enhancements or improvements are required. Thinking about this in the context of review coverage, one of the challenges sometimes in already-lean development teams is the time to give proper credence to PRs. Now, with AI-assisted quality scanning, we can be more confident in our overall evaluation and test coverage. I would expect that use of these tools alongside existing human review processes would increase repository code quality and reduce uncaught errors. The data points support this too. The Qodo 2025 AI Code Quality report showed that usage of AI code reviews increased quality improvements to 81% (from 55%). A similar study from Atlassian RovoDev 2026 study showed that 38.7% of comments left by AI agents in code reviews lead to additional code fixes. LLM’s in their current form are never going to achieve 100% accuracy however these are still considerable, significant gains in one of the most important (and often neglected) parts of the SDLC. With a significant number of software supply chain attacks recently it is also not a stretch to imagine that that many projects could benefit from "independently" (use this term loosely) reviewed and summarised PR's and commits. This in the future could potentially by a specialist/sub agent during a PR or merge to focus on identifying malicious code that may be hidden within otherwise normal contributions, case in point being the "near-miss" XZ Utils attack. Step 4: GitHub Actions for build and deploy - No agents here, just deterministic automation. This step will be our briefest, as the idea of CI/CD and automation needs no introduction. It is worth noting that while I am sure there are additional opportunities for using agents within a build and deploy pipeline, I have not investigated them. I often speak with customers about deterministic and non-deterministic business process automation, and the importance of distinguishing between the two. Some processes were created to be deterministic because that is all that was available at the time; the number of conditions required to deal with N possible flows just did not scale. However, now those processes can be non-deterministic. Good examples include IVR decision trees in customer service or hard-coded sales routines to retain a customer regardless of context; these would benefit from less determinism in their execution. However, some processes remain best as deterministic flows: financial transactions, policy engines, document ingestion. While all these flows may be part of an AI solution in the future (possibly as a tool an agent calls, or as part of a larger agent-based orchestration), the processes themselves are deterministic for a reason. Just because we could have dynamic decision-making doesn’t mean we should. Infrastructure deployment and CI/CD pipelines are one good example of this, in my opinion. We could have an agent decide what service best fits our codebase and which region we should deploy to, but do we really want to, and do the benefits outweigh the potential negatives? In this process flow we use a deterministic GitHub action to deploy our weather application into our “development” environment and then promote through the environments until we reach production and we want to now ensure that the application is running smoothly. We also use an action as mentioned above to deploy and surface our agents changes. In Azure Container Apps we can do this in a secure sandbox environment called a “Dynamic Session” to ensure strong isolation of what is essentially “untrusted code”. Often enterprises can view the building and development of AI applications as something that requires a completely new process to take to production, while certain additional processes are new, evaluation, model deployment etc many of our traditional SDLC principles are just as relevant as ever before, CI/CD pipelines being a great example of that. Checked in code that is predictably deployed alongside required services to run tests or promote through environments. Whether you are deploying a java calculator app or a multi agent customer service bot, CI/CD even in this new world is a non-negotiable. We can see that our geolocation feature is running on our Azure Container Apps revision and we can begin to evaluate if we agree with CoPilot that all the feature requirements have been met. In this case they have. If they hadn't we'd just jump into the PR and add a new comment with "@copilot" requesting our changes. Step 5: SRE Agent - Proactive agentic day two operations. The SRE agent service on Azure is an operations-focused agent that continuously watches a running service using telemetry such as logs, metrics, and traces. When it detects incidents or reliability risks, it can investigate signals, correlate likely causes, and propose or initiate response actions such as opening issues, creating runbook-guided fixes, or escalating to an on-call engineer. It effectively automates parts of day two operations while keeping humans in control of approval and remediation. It can be run in two different permission models: one with a reader role that can temporarily take user permissions for approved actions when identified. The other model is a privileged level that allows it to autonomously take approved actions on resources and resource types within the resource groups it is monitoring. In our example, our SRE agent could take actions to ensure our container app runs as intended: restarting pods, changing traffic allocations, and alerting for secret expiry. The SRE agent can also perform detailed debugging to save human SREs time, summarising the issue, fixes tried so far, and narrowing down potential root causes to reduce time to resolution, even across the most complex issues. My initial concern with these types of autonomous fixes (be it VPA on Kubernetes or an SRE agent across your infrastructure) is always that they can very quickly mask problems, or become an anti-pattern where you have drift between your IaC and what is actually running in Azure. One of my favourite features of SRE agents is sub-agents. Sub-agents can be created to handle very specific tasks that the primary SRE agent can leverage. Examples include alerting, report generation, and potentially other third-party integrations or tooling that require a more concise context. In my example, I created a GitHub sub-agent to be called by the primary agent after every issue that is resolved. When called, the GitHub sub-agent creates an issue summarising the origin, context, and resolution. This really brings us full circle. We can then potentially assign this to our coding agent to implement the fix before we proceed with the rest of the cycle; for example, a change where a port is incorrect in some Bicep, or min scale has been adjusted because of latency observed by the SRE agent. These are quick fixes that can be easily implemented by a coding agent, subsequently creating an autonomous feedback loop with human review. Conclusion: The journey through this AI-led SDLC demonstrates that it is possible, with today’s tooling, to improve any existing SDLC with AI assistance, evolving from simply using a chat interface in an IDE. By combining Speckit, spec-driven development, autonomous coding agents, AI-augmented quality checks, deterministic CI/CD pipelines, and proactive SRE agents, we see an emerging ecosystem where human creativity and oversight guide an increasingly capable fleet of collaborative agents. As with all AI solutions we design today, I remind myself that “this is as bad as it gets”. If the last two years are anything to go by, the rate of change in this space means this article may look very different in 12 months. I imagine Spec-to-issue will no longer be required as a bridge, as native solutions evolve to make this process even smoother. There are also some areas of an AI-led SDLC that are not included in this post, things like reviewing the inner-loop process or the use of existing enterprise patterns and blueprints. I also did not review use of third-party plugins or tools available through GitHub. These would make for an interesting expansion of the demo. We also did not look at the creation of custom coding agents, which could be hosted in Microsoft Foundry; this is especially pertinent with the recent announcement of Anthropic models now being available to deploy in Foundry. Does today’s tooling mean that developers, QAs, and engineers are no longer required? Absolutely not (and if I am honest, I can’t see that changing any time soon). However, it is evidently clear that in the next 12 months, enterprises who reshape their SDLC (and any other business process) to become one augmented by agents will innovate faster, learn faster, and deliver faster, leaving organisations who resist this shift struggling to keep up.
Migrating Ant Builds to Maven with GitHub Copilot app modernization
Many legacy Java applications still rely on Apache Ant for building, packaging, and dependency management. While Ant remains flexible, it lacks the structured lifecycle, dependency resolution, and ecosystem support that modern build tools like Maven provide. Migrating from Ant to Maven improves maintainability, build reproducibility, IDE compatibility, and enables modern Java workflows such as dependency upgrades, framework updates, and containerization. GitHub Copilot app modernization accelerates this transition by analyzing an Ant‑based project, generating a migration plan, and applying transformations to produce a Maven‑based build aligned with modern Java tooling. What GitHub Copilot app modernization Supports GitHub Copilot app modernization can help teams: Detect Ant build scripts (build.xml) and related custom task files Recommend Maven project structure and lifecycle alignment Generate an initial pom.xml with matched project metadata Map Ant targets to Maven phases where possible Identify external dependencies and translate them into Maven coordinates Migrate resource directories and compiled output locations Surface code or configuration changes required for a Maven‑driven build Validate the new Maven configuration through iterative builds This modernizes the build foundation before performing other upgrades such as JDK, Spring, Jakarta, or container‑readiness transformations. Project Analysis When you open an Ant‑based project in Visual Studio Code or IntelliJ IDEA, GitHub Copilot app modernization performs an analysis: Detects build.xml and auxiliary Ant scripts Identifies classpaths defined across Ant targets Evaluates manually referenced JARs in lib directories Inspects source layout and output directories Determines project metadata such as groupId, artifactId, and version Determines whether frameworks or libraries require updates before Maven migration This analysis forms the basis of the migration plan. Migration Plan Generation GitHub Copilot app modernization produces a migration plan that outlines: The recommended Maven project layout (src/main/java, src/test/java, resources directories) A generated pom.xml with discovered dependencies Mapped Ant targets to Maven lifecycle phases (compile, test, package) Plugin configurations needed to replicate custom Ant functionality Suggested removal of lib directory JARs in favor of dependency management Notes on unsupported or manual‑review areas (custom Ant tasks, script‑heavy targets, specialized packaging logic) You can review and adjust the plan before proceeding. Automated Transformations Once confirmed, GitHub Copilot app modernization applies targeted updates: Generates the project’s pom.xml Migrates dependency JAR references to Maven dependency entries Moves source and resource files into Maven‑compatible structure Updates ignore files, build output directories, and paths Introduces common Maven plugins for compiler, surefire, assembly, or shading Suggests replacements for custom Ant tasks if built‑in Maven plugins exist This automated work removes most of the manual lifting normally required for Ant → Maven transitions. Build & Fix Iteration After applying the transformations, the tool attempts to build the new Maven project: Runs the build Captures missing dependencies, incorrect scopes, or misaligned plugin versions Suggests targeted fixes Applies adjustments and rebuilds Iterates until the project compiles or no further automated fixes are possible This helps stabilize the migration quickly. Security & Behavior Validation GitHub Copilot app modernization also performs additional validation: Flags CVEs introduced or resolved through dependency discovery Alerts you to behavioral differences between Ant‑driven and Maven‑driven builds Highlights test failures, packaging differences, or altered classpaths that may need review These findings allow developers to refine the migration safely. Expected Output After the migration, you can expect: A newly generated and fully structured Maven project A populated pom.xml with dependencies, plugins, and metadata Updated project layout aligned with Maven standards Removed or deprecated Ant build files where appropriate Aligned dependency versions ready for further modernization A summary file detailing: Build changes Dependency mappings Code or config adjustments Remaining manual review items Developer Responsibilities While GitHub Copilot app modernization automates the mechanical migration from Ant to Maven, developers remain responsible for: Reviewing tests and build artifacts for behavioral differences Validating packaging steps for WAR/EAR/JAR outputs Replacing complex custom Ant scripts with proper Maven plugins Verifying deployment and CI workflows dependent on Ant build logic Confirming integration points that rely on Ant‑specific tasks or ordering Once validated, the Maven‑based structure becomes a strong foundation for further modernization such as JDK upgrades, Spring migration, Jakarta adoption, and containerization. Learn More For project setup and the complete modernization workflow, refer to the Microsoft Learn guide for upgrading Java projects with GitHub Copilot app modernization. Quickstart: Upgrade a Java Project with GitHub Copilot App Modernization | Microsoft LearnUnlocking Application Modernisation with GitHub Copilot
AI-driven modernisation is unlocking new opportunities you may not have even considered yet. It's also allowing organisations to re-evaluate previously discarded modernisation attempts that were considered too hard, complex or simply didn't have the skills or time to do. During Microsoft Build 2025, we were introduced to the concept of Agentic AI modernisation and this post from Ikenna Okeke does a great job of summarising the topic - Reimagining App Modernisation for the Era of AI | Microsoft Community Hub. This blog post however, explores the modernisation opportunities that you may not even have thought of yet, the business benefits, how to start preparing your organisation, empowering your teams, and identifying where GitHub Copilot can help. I’ve spent the last 8 months working with customers exploring usage of GitHub Copilot, and want to share what my team members and I have discovered in terms of new opportunities to modernise, transform your applications, bringing some fun back into those migrations! Let’s delve into how GitHub Copilot is helping teams update old systems, move processes to the cloud, and achieve results faster than ever before. Background: The Modernisation Challenge (Then vs Now) Modernising legacy software has always been hard. In the past, teams faced steep challenges: brittle codebases full of technical debt, outdated languages (think decades-old COBOL or VB6), sparse documentation, and original developers long gone. Integrating old systems with modern cloud services often requiring specialised skills that were in short supply – for example, check out this fantastic post from Arvi LiVigni (@arilivigni ) which talks about migrating from COBOL “the number of developers who can read and write COBOL isn’t what it used to be,” making those systems much harder to update". Common pain points included compatibility issues, data migrations, high costs, security vulnerabilities, and the constant risk that any change could break critical business functions. It’s no wonder many modernisation projects stalled or were “put off” due to their complexity and risk. So, what’s different now (circa 2025) compared to two years ago? In a word: Intelligent AI assistance. Tools like GitHub Copilot have emerged as AI pair programmers that dramatically lower the barriers to modernisation. Arvi’s post talks about how only a couple of years ago, developers had to comb through documentation and Stack Overflow for clues when deciphering old code or upgrading frameworks. Today, GitHub Copilot can act like an expert co-developer inside your IDE, ready to explain mysterious code, suggest updates, and even rewrite legacy code in modern languages. This means less time fighting old code and more time implementing improvements. As Arvi says “nine times out of 10 it gives me the right answer… That speed – and not having to break out of my flow – is really what’s so impactful.” In short, AI coding assistants have evolved from novel experiments to indispensable tools, reimagining how we approach software updates and cloud adoption. I’d also add from my own experience – the models we were using 12 months ago have already been superseded by far superior models with ability to ingest larger context and tackle even further complexity. It's easier to experiment, and fail, bringing more robust outcomes – with such speed to create those proof of concepts, experimentation and failing faster, this has also unlocked the ability to test out multiple hypothesis’ and get you to the most confident outcome in a much shorter space of time. Modernisation is easier now because AI reduces the heavy lifting. Instead of reading the 10,000-line legacy program alone, a developer can ask Copilot to explain what the code does or even propose a refactored version. Rather than manually researching how to replace an outdated library, they can get instant recommendations for modern equivalents. These advancements mean that tasks which once took weeks or months can now be done in days or hours – with more confidence and less drudgery - more fun! The following sections will dive into specific opportunities unlocked by GitHub Copilot across the modernisation journey which you may not even have thought of. Modernisation Opportunities Unlocked by Copilot Modernising an application isn’t just about updating code – it involves bringing everyone and everything up to speed with cloud-era practices. Below are several scenarios and how GitHub Copilot adds value, with the specific benefits highlighted: 1. AI-Assisted Legacy Code Refactoring and Upgrades Instant Code Comprehension: GitHub Copilot can explain complex legacy code in plain English, helping developers quickly understand decades-old logic without scouring scarce documentation. For example, you can highlight a cryptic COBOL or C++ function and ask Copilot to describe what it does – an invaluable first step before making any changes. This saves hours and reduces errors when starting a modernisation effort. Automated Refactoring Suggestions: The AI suggests modern replacements for outdated patterns and APIs, and can even translate code between languages. For instance, Copilot can help convert a COBOL program into JavaScript or C# by recognising equivalent constructs. It also uses transformation tools (like OpenRewrite for Java/.NET) to systematically apply code updates – e.g. replacing all legacy HTTP calls with a modern library in one sweep. Developers remain in control, but GitHub Copilot handles the tedious bulk edits. Bulk Code Upgrades with AI: GitHub Copilot’s App Modernisation capabilities can analyse an entire codebase and generate a detailed upgrade plan, then execute many of the code changes automatically. It can upgrade framework versions (say from .NET Framework 4.x to .NET 6, or Java 8 to Java 17) by applying known fix patterns and even fixing compilation errors after the upgrade. Teams can finally tackle those hundreds of thousand-line enterprise applications – a task that could take multiple years with GitHub Copilot handling the repetitive changes. Technical Debt Reduction: By cleaning up old code and enforcing modern best practices, GitHub Copilot helps chip away at years of technical debt. The modernised codebase is more maintainable and stable, which lowers the long-term risk hanging over critical business systems. Notably, the tool can even scan for known security vulnerabilities during refactoring as it updates your code. In short, each legacy component refreshed with GitHub Copilot comes out safer and easier to work on, instead of remaining a brittle black box. 2. Accelerating Cloud Migration and Azure Modernisation Guided Azure Migration Planning: GitHub Copilot can assess a legacy application’s cloud readiness and recommend target Azure services for each component. For instance, it might suggest migrating an on-premises database to Azure SQL, moving file storage to Azure Blob Storage, and converting background jobs to Azure Functions. This provides a clear blueprint to confidently move an app from servers to Azure PaaS. One-Click Cloud Transformations: GitHub Copilot comes with predefined migration tasksthat automate the code changes required for cloud adoption. With one click, you can have the AI apply dozens of modifications across your codebase. For example: File storage: Replace local file read/writes with Azure Blob Storage SDK calls. Email/Comms: Swap out SMTP email code for Azure Communication Services or SendGrid. Identity: Migrate authentication from Windows AD to Azure AD (Entra ID) libraries. Configuration: Remove hard-coded configurations and use Azure App Configuration or Key Vault for secrets. GitHub Copilot performs these transformations consistently, following best practices (like using connection strings from Azure settings). After applying the changes, it even fixes any compile errors automatically, so you’re not left with broken builds. What used to require reading countless Azure migration guides is now handled in minutes. Automated Validation & Deployment: Modernisation doesn’t stop at code changes. GitHub Copilot can also generate unit tests to validate that the application still behaves correctly after the migration. It helps ensure that your modernised, cloud-ready app passes all its checks before going live. When you’re ready to deploy, GitHub Copilot can produce the necessary Infrastructure-as-Code templates (e.g. Azure Resource Manager Bicep files or Terraform configs) and even set up CI/CD pipeline scripts for you. In other words, the AI can configure the Azure environment and deployment process end-to-end. This dramatically reduces manual effort and error, getting your app to the cloud faster and with greater confidence. Integrations: GitHub Copilot also helps tackle larger migration scenarios that were previously considered too complex. For example, many enterprises want to retire expensive proprietary integration platforms like MuleSoft or Apigee and use Azure-native services instead, but rewriting hundreds of integration workflows was daunting. Now, GitHub Copilot can assist in translating those workflows: for instance, converting an Apigee API proxy into an Azure API Management policy, or a MuleSoft integration into an Azure Logic App. Multi-Cloud Migrations: if you plan to consolidate from other clouds into Azure, GitHub Copilot can suggest equivalent Azure services and SDK calls to replace AWS or GCP-specific code. These AI-assisted conversions significantly cut down the time needed to reimplement functionality on Azure. The business impact can be substantial. By lowering the effort of such migrations, GitHub Copilot makes it feasible to pursue opportunities that deliver big cost savings and simplification. 3. Boosting Developer Productivity and Quality Instant Unit Tests (TDD Made Easy): Writing tests for old code can be tedious, but GitHub Copilot can generate unit test cases on the fly. Developers can highlight an existing function and ask Copilot to create tests; it will produce meaningful test methods covering typical and edge scenarios. This makes it practical to apply test-driven development practices even to legacy systems – you can quickly build a safety net of tests before refactoring. By catching bugs early through these AI-generated tests, teams gain confidence to modernise code without breaking things. It essentially injects quality into the process from the start, which is crucial for successful modernisation. DevOps Automation: GitHub Copilot helps modernise your build and deployment process as well. It can draft CI/CD pipeline configurations, Dockerfiles, Kubernetes manifests, and other DevOps scripts by leveraging its knowledge of common patterns. For example, when setting up a GitHub Actions workflow to deploy your app, GitHub Copilot will autocomplete significant parts (like build steps, test runs, deployment jobs) based on the project structure. This not only saves time but also ensures best practices (proper caching, dependency installation, etc.) are followed by default. Microsoft even provides an extension where you can describe your Azure infrastructure needs in plain language and have GitHub Copilot generate the corresponding templates and pipeline YAML. By automating these pieces, teams can move to cloud-based, automated deployments much faster. Behaviour-Driven Development Support: Teams practicing BDD write human-readable scenarios (e.g. using Gherkin syntax) describing application behaviour. GitHub Copilot’s AI is adept at interpreting such descriptions and suggesting step definition code or test implementations to match. For instance, given a scenario “When a user with no items checks out, then an error message is shown,” GitHub Copilot can draft the code for that condition or the test steps required. This helps bridge the gap between non-technical specifications and actual code. It makes BDD more efficient and accessible, because even if team members aren’t strong coders, the AI can translate their intent into working code that developers can refine. Quality and Consistency: By using AI to handle boilerplate and repetitive tasks, developers can focus more on high-value improvements. GitHub Copilot’s suggestions are based on a vast corpus of code, which often means it surfaces well-structured, idiomatic patterns. Starting from these suggestions, developers are less likely to introduce errors or reinvent the wheel, which leads to more consistent code quality across the project. The AI also often reminds you of edge cases (for example, suggesting input validation or error handling code that might be missed), contributing to a more robust application. In practice, many teams find that adopting GitHub Copilot results in fewer bugs and quicker code reviews, as the code is cleaner on the first pass. It’s like having an extra set of eyes on every pull request, ensuring standards are met. Business Benefits of AI-Powered Modernisation Bringing together the technical advantages above, what’s the payoff for the business and stakeholders? Modernising with GitHub Copilot can yield multiple tangible and intangible benefits: Accelerated Time-to-Market: Modernisation projects that might have taken a year can potentially be completed in a few months, or an upgrade that took weeks can be done in days. This speed means you can deliver new features to customers sooner and respond faster to market changes. It also reduces downtime or disruption since migrations happen more swiftly. Cost Savings: By automating repetitive work and reducing the effort required from highly paid senior engineers, GitHub Copilot can trim development costs. Faster project completion also means lower overall project cost. Additionally, running modernised apps on cloud infrastructure (with updated code) often lowers operational costs due to more efficient resource usage and easier maintenance. There’s also an opportunity cost benefit: developers freed up by Copilot can work on other value-adding projects in parallel. Improved Quality & Reliability: GitHub Copilot’s contributions to testing, bug-fixing, and even security (like patching known vulnerabilities during upgrades) result in more robust applications. Modernised systems have fewer outages and security incidents than shaky legacy ones. Stakeholders will appreciate that with GitHub Copilot, modernisation doesn’t mean “trading one set of bugs for another” – instead, you can increase quality as you modernise (GitHub’s research noted higher code quality when using Copilot, as developers are less likely to introduce errors or skip tests). Business Agility: A modernised application (especially one refactored for cloud) is typically more scalable and adaptable. New integrations or features can be added much faster once the platform is up-to-date. GitHub Copilot helps clear the modernisation hurdle, after which the business can innovate on a solid, flexible foundation (for example, once a monolith is broken into microservices or moved to Azure PaaS, you can iterate on it much faster in the future). AI-assisted modernisation thus unlocks future opportunities (like easier expansion, integrations, AI features, etc.) that were impractical on the legacy stack. Employee Satisfaction and Innovation: Developer happiness is a subtle but important benefit. When tedious work is handled by AI, developers can spend more time on creative tasks – designing new features, improving user experience, exploring new technologies. This can foster a culture of innovation. Moreover, being seen as a company that leverages modern tools (like AI Copilot) helps attract and retain top tech talent. Teams that successfully modernise critical systems with Copilot will gain confidence to tackle other ambitious projects, creating a positive feedback loop of improvement. To sum up, GitHub Copilot acts as a force-multiplier for application modernisation. It enables organisations to do more with less: convert legacy “boat anchors” into modern, cloud-enabled assets rapidly, while improving quality and developer morale. This aligns IT goals with business goals – faster delivery, greater efficiency, and readiness for the future. Call to Action: Embrace the Future of Modernisation GitHub Copilot has proven to be a catalyst for transforming how we approach legacy systems and cloud adoption. If you’re excited about the possibilities, here are next steps and what to watch for: Start Experimenting: If you haven’t already, try GitHub Copilot on a sample of your code. Use Copilot or Copilot Chat to explain a piece of old code or generate a unit test. Seeing it in action on your own project can build confidence and spark ideas for where to apply it. Identify a Pilot Project: Look at your application portfolio for a candidate that’s ripe for modernisation – maybe a small legacy service that could be moved to Azure, or a module that needs a refactor. Use GitHub Copilot to assess and estimate the effort. Often, you’ll find tasks once deemed “too hard” might now be feasible. Early successes will help win support for larger initiatives. Stay Tuned for Our Upcoming Blog Series: This post is just the beginning. In forthcoming posts, we’ll dive deeper into: Setting Up Your Organisation for Copilot Adoption: Practical tips on preparing your enterprise environment – from licensing and security considerations to training programs. We’ll discuss best practices (like running internal awareness campaigns, defining success metrics, and creating Copilot champions in your teams) to ensure a smooth rollout. Empowering Your Colleagues: How to foster a culture that embraces AI assistance. This includes enabling continuous learning, sharing prompt techniques and knowledge bases, and addressing any scepticism. We’ll cover strategies to support developers in using Copilot effectively, so that everyone from new hires to veteran engineers can amplify their productivity. Identifying High-Impact Modernisation Areas: Guidance on spotting where GitHub Copilot can add the most value. We’ll look at different domains – code, cloud, tests, data – and how to evaluate opportunities (for example, using telemetry or feedback to find repetitive tasks suited for AI, or legacy components with high ROI if modernised). Engage and Share: As you start leveraging Copilot for modernisation, share your experiences and results. Success stories (even small wins like “GitHub Copilot helped reduce our code review times” or “we migrated a component to Azure in 1 sprint”) can build momentum within your organisation and the broader community. We invite you to discuss and ask questions in the comments or in our tech community forums. Take a look at the new App Modernisation Guidance—a comprehensive, step-by-step playbook designed to help organisations: Understand what to modernise and why Migrate and rebuild apps with AI-first design Continuously optimise with built-in governance and observability Modernisation is a journey, and AI is the new compass and Copilot to guide the way. By embracing tools like GitHub Copilot, you position your organisation to break through modernisation barriers that once seemed insurmountable. The result is not just updated software, but a more agile, cloud-ready business and a happier, more productive development team. Now is the time to take that step. Empower your team with Copilot, and unlock the full potential of your applications and your developers. Stay tuned for more insights in our next posts, and let’s modernise what’s possible together!New Portal Experience for Feature Management
Feature flags have become an essential tool for modern software development, enabling teams to deploy code safely, control feature rollouts, and experiment with new functionality without the risk of breaking production environments. As AI becomes increasingly integrated into applications— from LLM-powered features to model version management— the need for safe, controlled deployments has never been more critical. The previous experience forced you to make a decision upfront: should I create a feature flag or a variant feature flag? What's the difference between these options? Which one do I need for my use case? Did I make a wrong choice? Do I need to delete and start over? Our new portal experience starts with your goal instead of requiring deep knowledge of feature flag architecture. The new experience asks you: What will you be using your feature flag for? Scenarios That Match How You Think When you select a scenario, the portal dynamically adjusts to reveal only the relevant configuration tabs and options. Switch shows straightforward toggle controls, Rollout presents percentage and targeting options, and Experiment allows variant allocation and traffic distribution settings. Let's dive deeper into how they fit into your needs. Switch: "I need an on/off toggle" Immediate on/off control over features, that is commonly used for: Emergency kill switches: Instantly disable problematic features or AI models in production Maintenance mode: Toggle site-wide maintenance without deployments Feature gating: Block access to beta features for non-beta users Debug modes: Enable verbose logging or diagnostic features for troubleshooting Regional compliance: Quickly disable features that conflict with local regulations Fallback mode: Switch from AI-powered responses to rule-based responses during model downtime Rollout: "I want to control who gets this and when" Gradual exposure with smart targeting for controlled feature releases that can be useful for: Canary deployments: Start with 5% of users, gradually increase to 100% Geographic rollouts: Launch multimodal AI in one region (e.g US-West), then expand based on language model performance Subscription tiers: Give premium features to paid users first (e.g provide RAG-enhanced search to enterprise users) Employee dogfooding: Internal testing before customer release, test new LLM-powered features with employees before customer release Time-based releases: Automatically activate features during business hours Load testing: Gradually increase traffic to stress-test new infrastructure Experiment: "I want to make informed data-driven decisions" Here's the key: You don't necessarily have to run statistical experiments. Beyond A/B testing, this scenario can be applied if you have multiple variants of something - different algorithms, UI layouts, configurations, or business logic paths - and is typically utilized for: Statistical Analysis, A/B Testing & Experiments: Conversion optimization: Test different checkout flows to measure completion rates UI/UX experiments: Compare button colors, layouts, or copy to optimize user engagement Model comparison: Compare Claude vs GPT-4 vs Gemini for completion rates and accuracy Pricing strategy tests: Evaluate different pricing models with statistical significance Algorithm performance: Compare recommendation engines using click-through rates and revenue metrics Configuration & Variant Management: Configuration management: Serve different API timeout values to different regions Feature variants: Offer basic/premium/enterprise feature sets through one flag Model routing: Route traffic between fine-tuned model, base model, and RAG-enhanced model based on query complexity Content personalization: Show different onboarding flows based on user characteristics (e.g show different system instructions based on user expertise level for prompt personalization) Multi-tenant customization: Serve tenant-specific configurations and behaviors Check out Azure App Configuration Feature manager in action in this demo video: Experience the new approach today: 1. Navigate to your App Configuration resource in the Azure Portal 2. Go to Operations > Feature manager > Create 3. Selecting your scenario: Switch, Rollout, or Experiment and the subsequent setup steps will appear dynamically in tabs 4. Configure with purpose-built options that match your chosen scenario Telemetry can be enabled in all scenarios if your App Configuration store is connected to an App Insights Workspace. This update doesn't change how your existing flags work, the scenario-based approach simply improves new flag creation process on the Azure App Configuration Portal. This scenario-based approach is just the beginning. We're continuing to invest in making feature management more intuitive, starting with insights into better performing variants to AI experimentation. Additional resources: Manage feature flags in Azure App Configuration Understand feature management using Azure App Configuration | Microsoft Learn Questions about the new experience? Comment below! #Azure #FeatureFlags #AppConfiguration #DeveloperExperience #FeatureManager #AzurePortal #Experimentation #RolloutPublic Preview of Split Experimentation in Azure App Configuration
We're thrilled to announce the public preview of Split Experimentation in Azure App Configuration! This new capability extends feature flags to help you balance speed, accuracy, and safety in your application development. With seamless integration into Azure services and powered by Split's robust analysis, you can make data-driven decisions, mitigate risks, and optimize user experiences. Ready to unlock the full potential of feature management? Dive into our blog and start experimenting with our .NET sample today!
