AI Toolkit Extension Pack for Visual Studio Code: Ignite 2025 Update
Unlock the Latest Agentic App Capabilities The Ignite 2025 update delivers a major leap forward for the AI Toolkit extension pack in VS Code, introducing a unified, end-to-end environment for building, visualizing, and deploying agentic applications to Microsoft Foundry, and the addition of Anthropic’s frontier Claude models in the Model Catalog! This release enables developers to build and debug locally in VS Code, then deploy to the cloud with a single click. Seamlessly switch between VS Code and the Foundry portal for visualization, orchestration, and evaluation, creating a smooth roundtrip workflow that accelerates innovation and delivers a truly unified AI development experience. Download the http://aka.ms/aitoolkit today and start building next-generation agentic apps in VS Code! What Can You Do with the AI Toolkit Extension Pack? Access Anthropic models in the Model Catalog Following the Microsoft, NVIDIA and Anthropic strategic partnerships announcement today, we are excited to share that Anthropic’s frontier Claude models including Claude Sonnet 4.5, Claude Opus 4.1, and Claude Haiku 4.5, are now integrated into the AI Toolkit, providing even more choices and flexibility when building intelligent applications and AI agents. Build AI Agents Using GitHub Copilot Scaffold agent applications using best-practice patterns, tool-calling examples, tracing hooks, and test scaffolds, all powered by Copilot and aligned with the Microsoft Agent Framework. Generate agent code in Python or .NET, giving you flexibility to target your preferred runtime. Build and Customize YAML Workflows Design YAML-based workflows in the Foundry portal, then continue editing and testing directly in VS Code. To customize your YAML-based workflows, instantly convert it to Agent Framework code using GitHub Copilot. Upgrade from declarative design to code-first customization without starting from scratch. Visualize Multi-Agent Workflows Envision your code-based agent workflows with an interactive graph visualizer that reveals each component and how they connect Watch in real-time how each node lights up as you run your agent. Use the visualizer to understand and debug complex agent graphs, making iteration fast and intuitive. Experiment, Debug, and Evaluate Locally Use the Hosted Agents Playground to quickly interact with your agents on your development machine. Leverage local tracing support to debug reasoning steps, tool calls, and latency hotspots—so you can quickly diagnose and fix issues. Define metrics, tasks, and datasets for agent evaluation, then implement metrics using the Foundry Evaluation SDK and orchestrate evaluations runs with the help of Copilot. Seamless Integration Across Environments Jump from Foundry Portal to VS Code Web for a development environment in your preferred code editor setting. Open YAML workflows, playgrounds, and agent templates directly in VS Code for editing and deployment. How to Get Started Install the AI Toolkit extension pack from the VS Code marketplace. Check out documentation. Get started with building workflows with Microsoft Foundry in VS Code 1. Work with Hosted (Pro-code) Agent workflows in VS Code 2. Work with Declarative (Low-code) Agent workflows in VS Code Feedback & Support Try out the extensions and let us know what you think! File issues or feedback on our GitHub repo for Foundry extension and AI Toolkit extension. Your input helps us make continuous improvements.Is it a bug or a feature? Using Prompty to automatically track and tag issues.
Introduction You’ve probably noticed a theme in my recent posts: tackling challenges with AI-powered solutions. In my latest project, I needed a fast way to classify and categorize GitHub issues using a predefined set of tags. The tag data was there, but the connections between issues and tags weren’t. To bridge that gap, I combined Azure OpenAI Service, Prompty, and a GitHub to automatically extract and assign the right labels. By automating issue tagging, I was able to: Streamline contributor workflows with consistent, on-time labels that simplify triage Improve repository hygiene by keeping issues well-organized, searchable, and easy to navigate Eliminate repetitive maintenance so the team can focus on community growth and developer empowerment Scale effortlessly as the project expands, turning manual chores into intelligent automation Challenge: 46 issues, no tags The Prompty repository currently hosts 46 relevant, but untagged, issues. To automate labeling, I first defined a complete tag taxonomy. Then I built a solution using: Prompty for prompt templating and function calling Azure OpenAI (gpt-4o-mini) to classify each issue Azure AI Search for retrieval-augmented context (RAG) Python to orchestrate the workflow and integrate with GitHub By the end, you’ll have an autonomous agent that fetches open issues, matches them against your custom taxonomy, and applies labels back on GitHub. Prerequisites: An Azure account with Azure AI Search and Azure OpenAI enabled Python and Prompty installed Clone the repo and install dependencies: pip install -r requirements.txt Step 1: Define the prompt template We’ll use Prompty to structure our LLM instructions. If you haven’t yet, install the Prompty VS Code extension and refer to the Prompty docs to get started. Prompty combines: Tooling to configure and deploy models Runtime for executing prompts and function calls Specification (YAML) for defining prompts, inputs, and outputs Our Prompty is set to use gpt-4o-mini and below is our sample input: sample: title: Including Image in System Message tags: ${file:tags.json} description: An error arises in the flow, coming up starting from the "complete" block. It seems like it is caused by placing a static image in the system prompt, since removing it causes the issue to go away. Please let me know if I can provide additional context. The inputs will be the tags file implemented using RAG, then we will fetch the issue title and description from GitHub once a new issue is posted. Next, in our Prompty file, we gave instructions of how the LLLM should work as follows: system: You are an intelligent GitHub issue tagging assistant. Available tags: ${inputs} {% if tags.tags %} ## Available Tags {% for tag in tags.tags %} name: {{tag.name}} description: {{tag.description}} {% endfor %} {% endif %} Guidelines: 1. Only select tags that exactly match the provided list above 2. If no tags apply, return an empty array [] 3. Return ONLY a valid JSON array of strings, nothing else 4. Do not explain your choices or add any other text Use your understanding of the issue and refer to documentation at https://prompty.ai to match appropriate tags. Tags may refer to: - Issue type (e.g., bug, enhancement, documentation) - Tool or component (e.g., tool:cli, tracer:json-tracer) - Technology or integration (e.g., integration:azure, runtime:python) - Conceptual elements (e.g., asset:template-loading) Return only a valid JSON array of the issue title, description and tags. If the issue does not fit in any of the categories, return an empty array with: ["No tags apply to this issue. Please review the issue and try again."] Example: Issue Title: "App crashes when running in Azure CLI" Issue Body: "Running the generated code in Azure CLI throws a Python runtime error." Tag List: ["bug", "tool:cli", "runtime:python", "integration:azure"] Output: ["bug", "tool:cli", "runtime:python", "integration:azure"] user: Issue Title: {{title}} Issue Description: {{description}} Once the Prompty file was ready, I right clicked on the file and converted it to Prompty code, which provided a Python base code to get started from, instead of building from scratch. Step 2: enrich with context using Azure AI Search To be able to generate labels for our issues, I created a sample of tags, around 20, each with a title and a description of what it does. As a starting point, I started with Azure AI Foundry, where I uploaded the data and created an index. This typically takes about 1hr to successfully complete. Next, I implemented a retrieval function: def query_azure_search(query_text): """Query Azure AI Search for relevant documents and tags.""" search_client = SearchClient( endpoint=SEARCH_SERVICE_ENDPOINT, index_name=SEARCH_INDEX_NAME, credential=AzureKeyCredential(SEARCH_API_KEY) ) # Perform the search results = search_client.search( search_text=query_text, query_type=QueryType.SIMPLE, top=5 # Retrieve top 5 results ) # Extract content and tags from results documents = [doc["content"] for doc in results] tags = [doc.get("tags", []) for doc in results] # Assuming "tags" is a field in the index # Flatten and deduplicate tags unique_tags = list(set(tag for tag_list in tags for tag in tag_list)) return documents, unique_tags Step 3: Orchestrate the Workflow In addition, to adding RAG, I added functions in the basic.py file to: fetch_github_issues: calls the GitHub REST API to list open issues and filters out any that already have labels. run_with_rag: on the issues selected, calls the query_azure_search to append any retrieved docs, tags the issues and parses the JSON output from the prompt to a list for the labels label_issue: patches the issue to apply a list of labels. process_issues: this fetches all unlabelled issues, extracts the rag pipeline to generate the tags, and calls the labels_issue tag to apply the tags scheduler loop: this runs every so often to check if there's a new issue and apply a label Step 4: Validate and Run Ensure all .env variables are set (API keys, endpoints, token). Install dependencies and execute using: python basic.py Create a new GitHub issue and watch as your agent assigns tags in real time. Below is a short demo video here to illustrate the workflow. Next Steps Migrate from PATs to a GitHub App for tighter security Create multi-agent application and add an evaluator agent to review tags before publishing Integrate with GitHub Actions or Azure Pipelines for CI/CD Conclusion and Resources By combining Prompty, Azure AI Search, and Azure OpenAI, you can fully automate GitHub issue triage—improving consistency, saving time, and scaling effortlessly. Adapt this pattern to any classification task in your own workflows! You can learn more using the following resources: Prompty documentation to learn more on Prompty Agents for Beginners course to learn how you can build your own agentIntroducing langchain-azure-storage: Azure Storage integrations for LangChain
We're excited to introduce langchain-azure-storage , the first official Azure Storage integration package built by Microsoft for LangChain 1.0. As part of its launch, we've built a new Azure Blob Storage document loader (currently in public preview) that improves upon prior LangChain community implementations. This new loader unifies both blob and container level access, simplifying loader integration. More importantly, it offers enhanced security through default OAuth 2.0 authentication, supports reliably loading millions to billions of documents through efficient memory utilization, and allows pluggable parsing, so you can leverage other document loaders to parse specific file formats. What are LangChain document loaders? A typical Retrieval‑Augmented Generation (RAG) pipeline follows these main steps: Collect source content (PDFs, DOCX, Markdown, CSVs) — often stored in Azure Blob Storage. Parse into text and associated metadata (i.e., represented as LangChain Document objects). Chunk + embed those documents and store in a vector store (e.g., Azure AI Search, Postgres pgvector, etc.). At query time, retrieve the most relevant chunks and feed them to an LLM as grounded context. LangChain document loaders make steps 1–2 turnkey and consistent so the rest of the stack (splitters, vector stores, retrievers) “just works”. See this LangChain RAG tutorial for a full example of these steps when building a RAG application in LangChain. How can the Azure Blob Storage document loader help? The langchain-azure-storage package offers the AzureBlobStorageLoader , a document loader that simplifies retrieving documents stored in Azure Blob Storage for use in a LangChain RAG application. Key benefits of the AzureBlobStorageLoader include: Flexible loading of Azure Storage blobs to LangChain Document objects. You can load blobs as documents from an entire container, a specific prefix within a container, or by blob names. Each document loaded corresponds 1:1 to a blob in the container. Lazy loading support for improved memory efficiency when dealing with large document sets. Documents can now be loaded one-at-a-time as you iterate over them instead of all at once. Automatically uses DefaultAzureCredential to enable seamless OAuth 2.0 authentication across various environments, from local development to Azure-hosted services. You can also explicitly pass your own credential (e.g., ManagedIdentityCredential , SAS token). Pluggable parsing. Easily customize how documents are parsed by providing your own LangChain document loader to parse downloaded blob content. Using the Azure Blob Storage document loader Installation To install the langchain-azure-storage package, run: pip install langchain-azure-storage Loading documents from a container To load all blobs from an Azure Blob Storage container as LangChain Document objects, instantiate the AzureBlobStorageLoader with the Azure Storage account URL and container name: from langchain_azure_storage.document_loaders import AzureBlobStorageLoader loader = AzureBlobStorageLoader( "https://<your-storage-account>.blob.core.windows.net/", "<your-container-name>" ) # lazy_load() yields one Document per blob for all blobs in the container for doc in loader.lazy_load(): print(doc.metadata["source"]) # The "source" metadata contains the full URL of the blob print(doc.page_content) # The page_content contains the blob's content decoded as UTF-8 text Loading documents by blob names To only load specific blobs as LangChain Document objects, you can additionally provide a list of blob names: from langchain_azure_storage.document_loaders import AzureBlobStorageLoader loader = AzureBlobStorageLoader( "https://<your-storage-account>.blob.core.windows.net/", "<your-container-name>", ["<blob-name-1>", "<blob-name-2>"] ) # lazy_load() yields one Document per blob for only the specified blobs for doc in loader.lazy_load(): print(doc.metadata["source"]) # The "source" metadata contains the full URL of the blob print(doc.page_content) # The page_content contains the blob's content decoded as UTF-8 text Pluggable parsing By default, loaded Document objects contain the blob's UTF-8 decoded content. To parse non-UTF-8 content (e.g., PDFs, DOCX, etc.) or chunk blob content into smaller documents, provide a LangChain document loader via the loader_factory parameter. When loader_factory is provided, the AzureBlobStorageLoader processes each blob with the following steps: Downloads the blob to a new temporary file Passes the temporary file path to the loader_factory callable to instantiate a document loader Uses that loader to parse the file and yield Document objects Cleans up the temporary file For example, below shows parsing PDF documents with the PyPDFLoader from the langchain-community package: from langchain_azure_storage.document_loaders import AzureBlobStorageLoader from langchain_community.document_loaders import PyPDFLoader # Requires langchain-community and pypdf packages loader = AzureBlobStorageLoader( "https://<your-storage-account>.blob.core.windows.net/", "<your-container-name>", prefix="pdfs/", # Only load blobs that start with "pdfs/" loader_factory=PyPDFLoader # PyPDFLoader will parse each blob as a PDF ) # Each blob is downloaded to a temporary file and parsed by PyPDFLoader instance for doc in loader.lazy_load(): print(doc.page_content) # Content parsed by PyPDFLoader (yields one Document per page in the PDF) This file path-based interface allows you to use any LangChain document loader that accepts a local file path as input, giving you access to a wide range of parsers for different file formats. Migrating from community document loaders to langchain-azure-storage If you're currently using AzureBlobStorageContainerLoader or AzureBlobStorageFileLoader from the langchain-community package, the new AzureBlobStorageLoader provides an improved alternative. This section provides step-by-step guidance for migrating to the new loader. Steps to migrate To migrate to the new Azure Storage document loader, make the following changes: Depend on the langchain-azure-storage package Update import statements from langchain_community.document_loaders to langchain_azure_storage.document_loaders . Change class names from AzureBlobStorageFileLoader and AzureBlobStorageContainerLoader to AzureBlobStorageLoader . Update document loader constructor calls to: Use an account URL instead of a connection string. Specify UnstructuredLoader as the loader_factory to continue to use Unstructured for parsing documents. Enable Microsoft Entra ID authentication in environment (e.g., run az login or configure managed identity) instead of using connection string authentication. Migration samples Below shows code snippets of what usage patterns look like before and after migrating from langchain-community to langchain-azure-storage : Before migration from langchain_community.document_loaders import AzureBlobStorageContainerLoader, AzureBlobStorageFileLoader container_loader = AzureBlobStorageContainerLoader( "DefaultEndpointsProtocol=https;AccountName=<account>;AccountKey=<account-key>;EndpointSuffix=core.windows.net", "<container>", ) file_loader = AzureBlobStorageFileLoader( "DefaultEndpointsProtocol=https;AccountName=<account>;AccountKey=<account-key>;EndpointSuffix=core.windows.net", "<container>", "<blob>" ) After migration from langchain_azure_storage.document_loaders import AzureBlobStorageLoader from langchain_unstructured import UnstructuredLoader # Requires langchain-unstructured and unstructured packages container_loader = AzureBlobStorageLoader( "https://<account>.blob.core.windows.net", "<container>", loader_factory=UnstructuredLoader # Only needed if continuing to use Unstructured for parsing ) file_loader = AzureBlobStorageLoader( "https://<account>.blob.core.windows.net", "<container>", "<blob>", loader_factory=UnstructuredLoader # Only needed if continuing to use Unstructured for parsing ) What's next? We're excited for you to try the new Azure Blob Storage document loader and would love to hear your feedback! Here are some ways you can help shape the future of langchain-azure-storage : Show support for interface stabilization - The document loader is currently in public preview and the interface may change in future versions based on feedback. If you'd like to see the current interface marked as stable, upvote the proposal PR to show your support. Report issues or suggest improvements - Found a bug or have an idea to make the document loaders better? File an issue on our GitHub repository. Propose new LangChain integrations - Interested in other ways to use Azure Storage with LangChain (e.g., checkpointing for agents, persistent memory stores, retriever implementations)? Create a feature request or write to us to let us know. Your input is invaluable in making langchain-azure-storage better for the entire community! Resources langchain-azure GitHub repository langchain-azure-storage PyPI package AzureBlobStorageLoader usage guide AzureBlobStorageLoader documentation reference
Orchestrating Multi-Agent Intelligence: MCP-Driven Patterns in Agent Framework
Building reliable AI systems requires modular, stateful coordination and deterministic workflows that enable agents to collaborate seamlessly. The Microsoft Agent Framework provides these foundations, with memory, tracing, and orchestration built in. This implementation demonstrates four multi-agentic patterns — Single Agent, Handoff, Reflection, and Magentic Orchestration — showcasing different interaction models and collaboration strategies. From lightweight domain routing to collaborative planning and self-reflection, these patterns highlight the framework’s flexibility. At the core is Model Context Protocol (MCP), connecting agents, tools, and memory through a shared context interface. Persistent session state, conversation thread history, and checkpoint support are handled via Cosmos DB when configured, with an in-memory dictionary as a default fallback. This setup enables dynamic pattern swapping, performance comparison, and traceable multi-agent interactions — all within a unified, modular runtime. Business Scenario: Contoso Customer Support Chatbot Contoso’s chatbot handles multi-domain customer inquiries like billing anomalies, promotion eligibility, account locks, and data usage questions. These require combining structured data (billing, CRM, security logs, promotions) with unstructured policy documents processed via vector embeddings. Using MCP, the system orchestrates tool calls to fetch real-time structured data and relevant policy content, ensuring policy-aligned, auditable responses without exposing raw databases. This enables the assistant to explain anomalies, recommend actions, confirm eligibility, guide account recovery, and surface risk indicators—reducing handle time and improving first-contact resolution while supporting richer multi-agent reasoning. Architecture & Core Concepts The Contoso chatbot leverages the Microsoft Agent Framework to deliver a modular, stateful, and workflow-driven architecture. At its core, the system consists of: Base Agent: All agent patterns—single agent, reflection, handoff and magentic orchestration—inherit from a common base class, ensuring consistent interfaces for message handling, tool invocation, and state management. Backend: A FastAPI backend manages session routing, agent execution, and workflow orchestration. Frontend: A React-based UI (or Streamlit alternative) streams responses in real-time and visualizes agent reasoning and tool calls. Modular Runtime and Pattern Swapping One of the most powerful aspects of this implementation is its modular runtime design. Each agentic pattern—Single, Reflection, Handoff, and Magnetic—plugs into a shared execution pipeline defined by the base agent and MCP integration. By simply updating the .env configuration (e.g., agent_module=handoff), developers can swap in and out entire coordination strategies without touching the backend, frontend, or memory layers. This makes it easy to compare agent styles side by side, benchmark reasoning behaviors, and experiment with orchestration logic—all while maintaining a consistent, deterministic runtime. The same MCP connectors, FastAPI backend, and Cosmos/in-memory state management work seamlessly across every pattern, enabling rapid iteration and reliable evaluation. # Dynamic agent pattern loading agent_module_path = os.getenv("AGENT_MODULE") agent_module = __import__(agent_module_path, fromlist=["Agent"]) Agent = getattr(agent_module, "Agent") # Common MCP setup across all patterns async def _create_tools(self, headers: Dict[str, str]) -> List[MCPStreamableHTTPTool] | None: if not self.mcp_server_uri: return None return [MCPStreamableHTTPTool( name="mcp-streamable", url=self.mcp_server_uri, headers=headers, timeout=30, request_timeout=30, )] Memory & State Management State management is critical for multi-turn conversations and cross-agent workflows. The system supports two out-of-the-box options: Persistent Storage (Cosmos DB) Acts as the durable, enterprise-ready backend. Stores serialized conversation threads and workflow checkpoints keyed by tenant and session ID. Ensures data durability and auditability across restarts. In-Memory Session Store Default fallback when Cosmos DB credentials are not configured. Maintains ephemeral state per session for fast prototyping or lightweight use cases. All patterns leverage the same thread-based state abstraction, enabling: Session isolation: Each user session maintains its own state and history. Checkpointing: Multi-agent workflows can snapshot shared and executor-local state at any point, supporting pause/resume and fault recovery. Model Context Protocol (MCP): Acts as the connector between agents and tools, standardizing how data is fetched and results are returned to agents, whether querying structured databases or unstructured knowledge sources. Core Principles Across all patterns, the framework emphasizes: Modularity: Components are interchangeable—agents, tools, and state stores can be swapped without disrupting the system. Stateful Coordination: Multi-agent workflows coordinate through shared and local state, enabling complex reasoning without losing context. Deterministic Workflows: While agents operate autonomously, the workflow layer ensures predictable, auditable execution of multi-agent tasks. Unified Execution: From single-agent Q&A to complex Magentic orchestrations, every agent follows the same execution lifecycle and integrates seamlessly with MCP and the state store. Multi-Agent Patterns: Workflow and Coordination With the architecture and core concepts established, we can now explore the agentic patterns implemented in the Contoso chatbot. Each pattern builds on the base agent and MCP integration but differs in how agents orchestrate tasks and communicate with one another to handle multi-domain customer queries. In the sections that follow, we take a deeper dive into each pattern’s workflow and examine the under-the-hood communication flows between agents: Single Agent – A simple, single-domain agent handling straightforward queries. Reflection Agent – Allows agents to introspect and refine their outputs. Handoff Pattern – Routes conversations intelligently to specialized agents across domains. Magentic Orchestration – Coordinates multiple specialist agents for complex, parallel tasks. For each pattern, the focus will be on how agents communicate and coordinate, showing the practical orchestration mechanisms in action. Single Intelligent Agent The Single Agent Pattern represents the simplest orchestration style within the framework. Here, a single autonomous agent handles all reasoning, decision-making, and tool interactions directly — without delegation or multi-agent coordination. When a user submits a request, the single agent processes the query using all tools, memory, and data sources available through the Model Context Protocol (MCP). It performs retrieval, reasoning, and response composition in a single, cohesive loop. Communication Flow: User Input → Agent: The user submits a question or command. Agent → MCP Tools: The agent invokes one or more tools (e.g., vector retrieval, structured queries, or API calls) to gather relevant context and data. Agent → User: The agent synthesizes the tool outputs, applies reasoning, and generates the final response to the user. Session Memory: Throughout the exchange, the agent stores conversation history and extracted entities in the configured memory store (in-memory or Cosmos DB). Key Communication Principles: Single Responsibility: One agent performs both reasoning and action, ensuring fast response times and simpler state management. Direct Tool Invocation: The agent has direct access to all registered tools through MCP, enabling flexible retrieval and action chaining. Stateful Execution: The session memory preserves dialogue context, allowing the agent to maintain continuity across user turns. Deterministic Behavior: The workflow is fully predictable — input, reasoning, tool call, and output occur in a linear sequence. Reflection pattern The Reflection Pattern introduces a lightweight, two-agent communication loop designed to improve the quality and reliability of responses through structured self-review. In this setup, a Primary Agent first generates an initial response to the user’s query. This draft is then passed to a Reviewer Agent, whose role is to critique and refine the response—identifying gaps, inaccuracies, or missed context. Finally, the Primary Agent incorporates this feedback and produces a polished final answer for the user. This process introduces one round of reflection and improvement without adding excessive latency, balancing quality with responsiveness. Communication Flow: User Input → Primary Agent: The user submits a query. Primary Agent → Reviewer Agent: The primary generates an initial draft and passes it to the reviewer. Reviewer Agent → Primary Agent: The reviewer provides feedback or suggested improvements. Primary Agent → User: The primary revises its response and sends the refined version back to the user. Key Communication Principles: Two-Stage Dialogue: Structured interaction between Primary and Reviewer ensures each output undergoes quality assurance. Focused Review: The Reviewer doesn’t recreate answers—it critiques and enhances, reducing redundancy. Stateful Context: Both agents operate over the same shared memory, ensuring consistency between draft and revision. Deterministic Flow: A single reflection round guarantees predictable latency while still improving answer quality. Transparent Traceability: Each step—initial draft, feedback, and final output—is logged, allowing developers to audit reasoning or assess quality improvements over time. In practice, this pattern enables the system to reason about its own output before responding, yielding clearer, more accurate, and policy-aligned answers without requiring multiple independent retries. Handoff Pattern When a user request arrives, the system first routes it through an Intent Classifier (or triage agent) to determine which domain specialist should handle the conversation. Once identified, control is handed off directly to that Specialist Agent, which uses its own tools, domain knowledge, and state context to respond. This specialist continues to handle the user interaction as long as the conversation stays within its domain. If the user’s intent shifts — for example, moving from billing to security — the conversation is routed back to the Intent Classifier, which re-assigns it to the correct specialist agent. This pattern reduces latency and maintains continuity by minimizing unnecessary routing. Each handoff is tracked through the shared state store, ensuring seamless context carry-over and full traceability of decisions. Key Communication Principles: Dynamic Routing: The Intent Classifier routes user input to the right specialist domain. Domain Persistence: The specialist remains active while the user stays within its domain. Context Continuity: Conversation history and entities persist across agents through the shared state store. Traceable Handoffs: Every routing decision is logged for observability and auditability. Low Latency: Responses are faster since domain-appropriate agents handle queries directly. In practice, this means a user could begin a conversation about billing, continue seamlessly, and only be re-routed when switching topics — without losing any conversational context or history. Magentic Pattern The Magentic Pattern is designed for open-ended, multi-faceted tasks that require multiple agents to collaborate. It introduces a Manager (Planner) Agent, which interprets the user’s goal, breaks it into subtasks, and orchestrates multiple Specialist Agents to execute those subtasks. The Manager creates and maintains a Task Ledger, which tracks the status, dependencies, and results of each specialist’s work. As specialists perform their tool calls or reasoning, the Manager monitors their progress, gathers intermediate outputs, and can dynamically re-plan, dispatch additional tasks, or adjust the overall workflow. When all subtasks are complete, the Manager synthesizes the combined results into a coherent final response for the user. Key Communication Principles: Centralized Orchestration: The Manager coordinates all agent interactions and workflow logic. Parallel and Sequential Execution: Specialists can work simultaneously or in sequence based on task dependencies. Task Ledger: Acts as a transparent record of all task assignments, updates, and completions. Dynamic Re-planning: The Manager can modify or extend workflows in real time based on intermediate findings. Shared Memory: All agents access the same state store for consistent context and result sharing. Unified Output: The Manager consolidates results into one response, ensuring coherence across multi-agent reasoning. In practice, Magentic orchestration enables complex reasoning where the system might combine insights from multiple agents — e.g., billing, product, and security — and present a unified recommendation or resolution to the user. Choosing the Right Agent for Your Use Case Selecting the appropriate agent pattern hinges on the complexity of the task and the level of coordination required. As use cases evolve from straightforward queries to intricate, multi-step processes, the need for specialized orchestration increases. Below is a decision matrix to guide your choice: Feature / Requirement Single Agent Reflection Agent Handoff Pattern Magentic Orchestration Handles simple, domain-bound tasks ✔ ✔ ✖ ✖ Supports review / quality assurance ✖ ✔ ✖ ✔ Multi-domain routing ✖ ✖ ✔ ✔ Open-ended / complex workflows ✖ ✖ ✖ ✔ Parallel agent collaboration ✖ ✖ ✖ ✔ Direct tool access ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ Low latency / fast response ✔ ✔ ✔ ✖ Easy to implement / low orchestration ✔ ✔ ✖ ✖ Dive Deeper: Explore, Build, and Innovate We've explored various agent patterns, from Single Agent to Magentic Orchestration, each tailored to different use cases and complexities. To see these patterns in action, we invite you to explore our Github repo. Clone the repo, experiment with the examples, and adapt them to your own scenarios. Additionally, beyond the patterns discussed here, the repository also features a Human-in-the-Loop (HITL) workflow designed for fraud detection. This workflow integrates human oversight into AI decision-making, ensuring higher accuracy and reliability. For an in-depth look at this approach, we recommend reading our detailed blog post: Building Human-in-the-loop AI Workflows with Microsoft Agent Framework | Microsoft Community Hub Engage with these resources, and start building intelligent, reliable, and scalable AI systems today! This repository and content is developed and maintained by James Nguyen, Nicole Serafino, Kranthi Kumar Manchikanti, Heena Ugale, and Tim Sullivan.Study Buddy: Learning Data Science and Machine Learning with an AI Sidekick
If you've ever wished for a friendly companion to guide you through the world of data science and machine learning, you're not alone. As part of the "For Beginners" curriculum, I recently built a Study Buddy Agent, an AI-powered assistant designed to help learners explore data science interactively, intuitively, and joyfully. Why a Study Buddy? Learning something new can be overwhelming, especially when you're navigating complex topics like machine learning, statistics, or Python programming. The Study Buddy Agent is here to change that. It brings the curriculum to life by answering questions, offering explanations, and nudging learners toward deeper understanding, all in a conversational format. Think of it as your AI-powered lab partner: always available, never judgmental, and endlessly curious. Built with chatmodes, Powered by Purpose The agent lives inside a .chatmodes file in the https://github.com/microsoft/Data-Science-For-Beginners/blob/main/.github/chatmodes/study-mode.chatmode.md. This file defines how the agent behaves, what tone it uses, and how it interacts with learners. I designed it to be friendly, encouraging, and beginner-first—just like the curriculum itself. It’s not just about answering questions. The Study Buddy is trained to: Reinforce key concepts from the curriculum Offer hints and nudges when learners get stuck Encourage exploration and experimentation Celebrate progress and milestones What’s Under the Hood? The agent uses GitHub Copilot's chatmode, which allows developers to define custom behaviors for AI agents. By aligning the agent’s responses with the curriculum’s learning objectives, we ensure that learners stay on track while enjoying the flexibility of conversational learning. How You Can Use It YouTube Video here: Study Buddy - Data Science AI Sidekick Clone the repo: Head to the https://github.com/microsoft/Data-Science-For-Beginners and clone it locally or use Codespaces. Open the GitHub Copilot Chat, and select Study Buddy: This will activate the Study Buddy. Start chatting: Ask questions, explore topics, and let the agent guide you. What’s Next? This is just the beginning. I’m exploring ways to: Expand the agent to other beginner curriculums (Web Dev, AI, IoT) Integrate feedback loops so learners can shape the agent’s evolution Final Thoughts In my role, I believe learning should be inclusive, empowering, and fun. The Study Buddy Agent is a small step toward that vision, a way to make data science feel less like a mountain and more like a hike with a good friend. Try it out, share your feedback, and let’s keep building tools that make learning magical. Join us on Discord to share your feedback.From Cloud to Chip: Building Smarter AI at the Edge with Windows AI PCs
As AI engineers, we’ve spent years optimizing models for the cloud, scaling inference, wrangling latency, and chasing compute across clusters. But the frontier is shifting. With the rise of Windows AI PCs and powerful local accelerators, the edge is no longer a constraint it’s now a canvas. Whether you're deploying vision models to industrial cameras, optimizing speech interfaces for offline assistants, or building privacy-preserving apps for healthcare, Edge AI is where real-world intelligence meets real-time performance. Why Edge AI, Why Now? Edge AI isn’t just about running models locally, it’s about rethinking the entire lifecycle: - Latency: Decisions in milliseconds, not round-trips to the cloud. - Privacy: Sensitive data stays on-device, enabling HIPAA/GDPR compliance. - Resilience: Offline-first apps that don’t break when the network does. - Cost: Reduced cloud compute and bandwidth overhead. With Windows AI PCs powered by Intel and Qualcomm NPUs and tools like ONNX Runtime, DirectML, and Olive, developers can now optimize and deploy models with unprecedented efficiency. What You’ll Learn in Edge AI for Beginners The Edge AI for Beginners curriculum is a hands-on, open-source guide designed for engineers ready to move from theory to deployment. Multi-Language Support This content is available in over 48 languages, so you can read and study in your native language. What You'll Master This course takes you from fundamental concepts to production-ready implementations, covering: Small Language Models (SLMs) optimized for edge deployment Hardware-aware optimization across diverse platforms Real-time inference with privacy-preserving capabilities Production deployment strategies for enterprise applications Why EdgeAI Matters Edge AI represents a paradigm shift that addresses critical modern challenges: Privacy & Security: Process sensitive data locally without cloud exposure Real-time Performance: Eliminate network latency for time-critical applications Cost Efficiency: Reduce bandwidth and cloud computing expenses Resilient Operations: Maintain functionality during network outages Regulatory Compliance: Meet data sovereignty requirements Edge AI Edge AI refers to running AI algorithms and language models locally on hardware, close to where data is generated without relying on cloud resources for inference. It reduces latency, enhances privacy, and enables real-time decision-making. Core Principles: On-device inference: AI models run on edge devices (phones, routers, microcontrollers, industrial PCs) Offline capability: Functions without persistent internet connectivity Low latency: Immediate responses suited for real-time systems Data sovereignty: Keeps sensitive data local, improving security and compliance Small Language Models (SLMs) SLMs like Phi-4, Mistral-7B, Qwen and Gemma are optimized versions of larger LLMs, trained or distilled for: Reduced memory footprint: Efficient use of limited edge device memory Lower compute demand: Optimized for CPU and edge GPU performance Faster startup times: Quick initialization for responsive applications They unlock powerful NLP capabilities while meeting the constraints of: Embedded systems: IoT devices and industrial controllers Mobile devices: Smartphones and tablets with offline capabilities IoT Devices: Sensors and smart devices with limited resources Edge servers: Local processing units with limited GPU resources Personal Computers: Desktop and laptop deployment scenarios Course Modules & Navigation Course duration. 10 hours of content Module Topic Focus Area Key Content Level Duration 📖 00 Introduction to EdgeAI Foundation & Context EdgeAI Overview • Industry Applications • SLM Introduction • Learning Objectives Beginner 1-2 hrs 📚 01 EdgeAI Fundamentals Cloud vs Edge AI comparison EdgeAI Fundamentals • Real World Case Studies • Implementation Guide • Edge Deployment Beginner 3-4 hrs 🧠 02 SLM Model Foundations Model families & architecture Phi Family • Qwen Family • Gemma Family • BitNET • μModel • Phi-Silica Beginner 4-5 hrs 🚀 03 SLM Deployment Practice Local & cloud deployment Advanced Learning • Local Environment • Cloud Deployment Intermediate 4-5 hrs ⚙️ 04 Model Optimization Toolkit Cross-platform optimization Introduction • Llama.cpp • Microsoft Olive • OpenVINO • Apple MLX • Workflow Synthesis Intermediate 5-6 hrs 🔧 05 SLMOps Production Production operations SLMOps Introduction • Model Distillation • Fine-tuning • Production Deployment Advanced 5-6 hrs 🤖 06 AI Agents & Function Calling Agent frameworks & MCP Agent Introduction • Function Calling • Model Context Protocol Advanced 4-5 hrs 💻 07 Platform Implementation Cross-platform samples AI Toolkit • Foundry Local • Windows Development Advanced 3-4 hrs 🏭 08 Foundry Local Toolkit Production-ready samples Sample applications (see details below) Expert 8-10 hrs Each module includes Jupyter notebooks, code samples, and deployment walkthroughs, perfect for engineers who learn by doing. Developer Highlights - 🔧 Olive: Microsoft's optimization toolchain for quantization, pruning, and acceleration. - 🧩 ONNX Runtime: Cross-platform inference engine with support for CPU, GPU, and NPU. - 🎮 DirectML: GPU-accelerated ML API for Windows, ideal for gaming and real-time apps. - 🖥️ Windows AI PCs: Devices with built-in NPUs for low-power, high-performance inference. Local AI: Beyond the Edge Local AI isn’t just about inference, it’s about autonomy. Imagine agents that: - Learn from local context - Adapt to user behavior - Respect privacy by design With tools like Agent Framework, Azure AI Foundry and Windows Copilot Studio, and Foundry Local developers can orchestrate local agents that blend LLMs, sensors, and user preferences, all without cloud dependency. Try It Yourself Ready to get started? Clone the Edge AI for Beginners GitHub repo, run the notebooks, and deploy your first model to a Windows AI PC or IoT devices Whether you're building smart kiosks, offline assistants, or industrial monitors, this curriculum gives you the scaffolding to go from prototype to production.¡Curso oficial y gratuito de GenAI y Python! 🚀
¿Quieres aprender a usar modelos de IA generativa en tus aplicaciones de Python?Estamos organizando una serie de nueve transmisiones en vivo, en inglés y español, totalmente dedicadas a la IA generativa. Vamos a cubrir modelos de lenguaje (LLMs), modelos de embeddings, modelos de visión, y también técnicas como RAG, function calling y structured outputs. Además, te mostraremos cómo construir Agentes y servidores MCP, y hablaremos sobre seguridad en IA y evaluaciones, para asegurarnos de que tus modelos y aplicaciones generen resultados seguros. 🔗 Regístrate para toda la serie. Además de las transmisiones en vivo, puedes unirte a nuestras office hours semanales en el AI Foundry Discord de para hacer preguntas que no se respondan durante el chat. ¡Nos vemos en los streams! 👋🏻 Here’s your HTML converted into clean, readable text format (perfect for a newsletter, blog post, or social media caption): Modelos de Lenguaje 📅 7 de octubre, 2025 | 10:00 PM - 11:00 PM (UTC) 🔗 Regístrate para la transmisión en Reactor ¡Únete a la primera sesión de nuestra serie de Python + IA! En esta sesión, hablaremos sobre los Modelos de Lenguaje (LLMs), los modelos que impulsan ChatGPT y GitHub Copilot. Usaremos Python para interactuar con LLMs utilizando paquetes como el SDK de OpenAI y Langchain. Experimentaremos con prompt engineering y ejemplos few-shot para mejorar los resultados. También construiremos una aplicación full stack impulsada por LLMs y explicaremos la importancia de la concurrencia y el streaming en apps de IA orientadas al usuario. 👉 Si querés seguir los ejemplos en vivo, asegurate de tener una cuenta de GitHub. Embeddings Vectoriales 📅 8 de octubre, 2025 | 10:00 PM - 11:00 PM (UTC) 🔗 Regístrate para la transmisión en Reactor En la segunda sesión de Python + IA, exploraremos los embeddings vectoriales, una forma de codificar texto o imágenes como arrays de números decimales. Estos modelos permiten realizar búsquedas por similitud en distintos tipos de contenido. Usaremos modelos como la serie text-embedding-3 de OpenAI, visualizaremos resultados en Python y compararemos métricas de distancia. También veremos cómo aplicar cuantización y cómo usar modelos multimodales de embedding. 👉 Si querés seguir los ejemplos en vivo, asegurate de tener una cuenta de GitHub. Recuperación-Aumentada Generación (RAG) 📅 9 de octubre, 2025 | 10:00 PM - 11:00 PM (UTC) 🔗 Regístrate para la transmisión en Reactor En la tercera sesión, exploraremos RAG, una técnica que envía contexto al LLM para obtener respuestas más precisas dentro de un dominio específico. Usaremos distintas fuentes de datos —CSVs, páginas web, documentos, bases de datos— y construiremos una app RAG full-stack con Azure AI Search. Modelos de Visión 📅 14 de octubre, 2025 | 10:00 PM - 11:00 PM (UTC) 🔗 Regístrate para la transmisión en Reactor ¡La cuarta sesión trata sobre modelos de visión como GPT-4o y 4o-mini! Estos modelos pueden procesar texto e imágenes, generando descripciones, extrayendo datos, respondiendo preguntas o clasificando contenido. Usaremos Python para enviar imágenes a los modelos, crear una app de chat con imágenes e integrarlos en flujos RAG. 👉 Si querés seguir los ejemplos en vivo, asegurate de tener una cuenta de GitHub. Salidas Estructuradas 📅 15 de octubre, 2025 | 10:00 PM - 11:00 PM (UTC) 🔗 Regístrate para la transmisión en Reactor En la quinta sesión aprenderemos a hacer que los LLMs generen respuestas estructuradas según un esquema. Exploraremos el modo structured outputs de OpenAI y cómo aplicarlo para extracción de entidades, clasificación y flujos con agentes. 👉 Si querés seguir los ejemplos en vivo, asegurate de tener una cuenta de GitHub. Calidad y Seguridad 📅 16 de octubre, 2025 | 10:00 PM - 11:00 PM (UTC) 🔗 Regístrate para la transmisión en Reactor En la sexta sesión hablaremos sobre cómo usar IA de manera segura y evaluar la calidad de las salidas. Mostraremos cómo configurar Azure AI Content Safety, manejar errores en código Python y evaluar resultados con el SDK de Evaluación de Azure AI. Tool Calling 📅 21 de octubre, 2025 | 10:00 PM - 11:00 PM (UTC) 🔗 Regístrate para la transmisión en Reactor En la última semana de la serie, nos enfocamos en tool calling (function calling), la base para construir agentes de IA. Aprenderemos a definir herramientas en Python o JSON, manejar respuestas de los modelos y habilitar llamadas paralelas y múltiples iteraciones. 👉 Si querés seguir los ejemplos en vivo, asegurate de tener una cuenta de GitHub. Agentes de IA 📅 22 de octubre, 2025 | 10:00 PM - 11:00 PM (UTC) 🔗 Regístrate para la transmisión en Reactor ¡En la penúltima sesión construiremos agentes de IA! Usaremos frameworks como Langgraph, Semantic Kernel, Autogen, y Pydantic AI. Empezaremos con ejemplos simples y avanzaremos a arquitecturas más complejas como round-robin, supervisor, graphs y ReAct. Model Context Protocol (MCP) 📅 23 de octubre, 2025 | 10:00 PM - 11:00 PM (UTC) 🔗 Regístrate para la transmisión en Reactor Cerramos la serie con Model Context Protocol (MCP), la tecnología abierta más candente de 2025. Aprenderás a usar FastMCP para crear un servidor MCP local y conectarlo a chatbots como GitHub Copilot. También veremos cómo integrar MCP con frameworks de agentes como Langgraph, Semantic Kernel y Pydantic AI. Y, por supuesto, hablaremos sobre los riesgos de seguridad y las mejores prácticas para desarrolladores. ¿Querés que lo reformatee para publicación en Markdown (para blogs o repos) o en texto plano con emojis y separadores estilo redes sociales?Build Multi‑Agent AI Systems with Microsoft
Like many of you I have been on a journey to build AI systems where multiple agents (AI models with tools and autonomy) collaborate to solve complex tasks. In this post, I want to share the engineering challenges we faced, the architecture we designed with Azure AI Foundry, and the lessons learned along the way. Our goal is to empower AI engineers and developers to leverage multi-agent systems for real-world applications, with the benefit of Microsoft’s tools, research insights, and enterprise-grade platform. Why Multi‑Agent Systems? The Need for AI Teamwork Building a single AI agent to perform a task is often straightforward. However, many real-world processes are too complex for one agent alone. Tasks like in-depth research, enterprise workflow automation, or multi-step customer service involve context switching and specialized knowledge that overwhelm a lone chatbot. Multi-agent systems address this by distributing work across specialized agents while maintaining coordination. This approach brings several advantages: Scalability: Workloads can be split among agents, enabling horizontal scaling as tasks or data increase. More agents can handle more subtasks in parallel, avoiding bottlenecks. Specialisation: Each agent can be fine-tuned for a specific role or domain (e.g. research, summarisation, data extraction), which improves performance and maintainability. No single model has to be a master of all trades. Flexibility: Modular agents can be reused in different workflows or recombined to create new capabilities. It’s easy to extend the system by adding or swapping an agent without redesigning everything. Robustness: If one agent fails or underperforms, others can pick up the slack. Decoupling tasks means the overall system can tolerate faults better than a monolithic agent. This mirrors how human teams work: we achieve more by dividing and conquering complex problems. In fact, internal experiments and industry reports have shown that groups of AI agents can significantly outperform a single powerful model on complex, open-ended tasks. For example, Anthropic found a multi-agent system (Claude agents working together) answered 90% more queries correctly than a single-agent approach in one evaluation. The ability to operate in parallel is key – our experience likewise showed that multiple agents exploring different aspects of a problem can cover far more ground, albeit with increased resource usage. Challenge: A downside of multi-agent setups is they consume more resources (more model calls, more tokens) than single-agent runs. In Anthropic’s research, multi-agent systems used ~15× the tokens of a single chat session. We’ve observed similarly that letting agents think and interact in depth pays off in better results, but at a cost. Ensuring the task’s value justifies the cost is important when choosing a multi-agent solution. Designing the Architecture: Orchestration via a Lead Agent To harness these benefits, we designed a multi-agent architecture built around an orchestrator-worker pattern – very similar to Anthropic’s “lead agent and subagents” approach. In Azure AI Foundry (our enterprise AI platform), this takes shape as Connected Agents: a mechanism where a main agent can spawn and coordinate child agents to handle sub-tasks. The main agent is the brain of the operation, responsible for understanding the user’s request, breaking it into parts, and delegating those parts to the appropriate specialist agents. Each agent in the system is defined with three core components: Instructions (prompt/policy): defining the agent’s goal, role, and constraints (its “game plan”). Model: an LLM that powers the agent’s reasoning and dialogue (e.g. GPT-4 or other models available in Foundry). Tools: external capabilities the agent can invoke to get information or take actions (e.g. web search, databases, APIs). By composing agents with different instructions and tools, we create a team where each agent has a clear role. The main agent’s role is orchestration; the sub-agents focus on specific tasks. This separation of concerns makes the system easier to understand and debug, and prevents any single context window from becoming overloaded. How it works (overview): When a user query comes in, the lead agent analyzes the request and devises a plan. It may decide that multiple pieces of information or steps are needed. The lead agent then spins up subordinate agents in parallel to gather or compute those pieces]. Each sub-agent operates with its own context window and tools, exploring one aspect of the task. They report their findings back to the lead agent, which integrates the results and decides if more exploration is required. The loop continues until the lead agent is satisfied that it can produce a final answer, at which point it consolidates everything and returns the result to the user. This orchestrator/sub-agent pattern is powerful because it lets complex tasks be solved through natural language delegation rather than hard-coded logic. Notably, the main agent doesn’t need an if/else tree written by us to decide which sub-agent handles what; it uses the language model’s reasoning to route tasks. In Azure AI Foundry’s Connected Agents, the primary agent simply says (in effect) “You, Agent A, do X; You, Agent B, do Y,” and the platform handles the rest—no custom orchestration code needed. This drastically simplified our development: we focus on crafting the right prompts and agent designs, and let the AI figure out the coordination. Example: Sales Assistant with Specialist Agents To make this concrete, imagine a Sales Preparation Assistant that helps a sales team research a client before a meeting. Instead of trying to cram all knowledge and skills into one model, we give the assistant a team of four sub-agents, each an expert in a different area. The main agent (“Sales Assistant”) will ask each specialist for input and then compile a briefing. Agent Role Purpose & Task Example Tools/Models Used Market Research Agent Gathers industry trends and news related to the client’s sector. Bing Web Search, internal news API Competitive Analysis Agent Finds information on the client’s competitors and market position. Web Search, Company DB Customer Insights Agent Summarises the client’s history and interactions (from CRM data). Azure Cognitive Search on CRM, GPT-4 Financial Analysis Agent Reviews the client’s financial data and recent performance. Finance database query tool, Excel APIs Main Sales Assistant Orchestrator that delegates to the above agents, then synthesises a final report for the sales team. GPT-4 (with instructions to compile and format results) In this scenario, the Main Sales Assistant agent would ask each sub-agent to report on their specialty (market news, competition, CRM insights, finances). Rather than one AI trying to do it all (and possibly missing nuances), we have focused mini-AIs each doing a thorough job in parallel. This approach was shown to reduce the overall time required and improve the quality of the final output. In early trials, such multi-agent setups often succeed where single agents fall short – for instance, finding all relevant facts across disparate sources and preparing a comprehensive briefing more quickly. Development is easier too: if tomorrow we need to add a “Regulatory Compliance Agent” for a new client requirement, we can plug it in without retraining or heavily modifying the others. Orchestration under the hood: Azure AI Foundry’s Agent Service provides the runtime that makes all this work reliably. It manages the message passing between the main agent and sub-agents, ensures each tool invocation is executed (with retries on failure), and keeps a structured log of the entire multi-agent conversation (we call it a thread). This means developers don’t have to manually implement how agents call each other or share data; the platform handles those mechanics. Foundry also supports true agent-to-agent messaging if agents need to talk directly, but often a hierarchical pattern (through the main agent) suffices for task delegation. Tools, Knowledge, and the Model Context Protocol (MCP) For agents to be effective, especially in enterprise scenarios, they must integrate with external knowledge sources and services – no single LLM knows everything or can perform all actions. Microsoft’s approach emphasizes a rich tool integration layer. In our system, tools range from web search and databases to APIs for taking real actions (sending emails, executing workflows, etc.) Equipping agents with the right tools extends their capabilities dramatically: an agent can retrieve up-to-date info, pull data behind corporate firewalls, or trigger business processes. One key innovation is the Model-Context Protocol (MCP), which Foundry uses to manage tools. MCP provides a structured way for agents to discover and use tools dynamically at runtime. Traditionally, if you wanted your AI agent to use a new tool, you might have to hard-code that tool’s API and update the agent’s code or prompt. With MCP, tools are defined on a central tool server (with descriptions and endpoints), and agents can query this server to see what tools are available. The agent’s SDK then generates the necessary code “stubs” to call the tool on the fly. This means: Easier maintenance: You can add, update, or remove tools in one place (the MCP registry) without changing the agent’s code. When the Finance database API updates, just update its MCP entry; all agents automatically get the new version next time they run. Dynamic adaptability: Agents can choose tools based on context. For example, a research agent might discover that a new MarketAnalysisAPI tool is available and start using it for a finance query, whereas previously it only had a generic web search. Separation of concerns: Those building AI agents can rely on domain experts to maintain the tool definitions, while they focus on the agent logic. Agents treat tools in a uniform way, as functions they can call. In practice, tool selection became a critical part of our agent design. A lesson we learned is that giving agents access to the right tool, with a clear description, can make or break their performance. If a tool’s description is vague or overlapping with another, the agent might choose the wrong approach and wander down a blind alley. For instance, we saw cases where an agent would stubbornly query an internal knowledge base for information that actually only existed on the web, simply because the tool prompt made the web search sound less relevant. We addressed this by carefully curating tool descriptions and even building an internal tool-testing agent that automatically tries out tools and suggests better descriptions for them. Ensuring each tool had a distinct purpose and clear usage guidance dramatically improved our agents’ success rate in choosing the optimal tool for a given job. Finally, multi-modal support is worth noting. Some tasks involve not just text, but images or other media. Our multi-agent architecture, especially with Azure AI Foundry, can incorporate vision-capable models as agents or tools. For example, an “Image Analysis Agent” could be part of a team, or an agent might call a vision API tool. The Telco customer service demo (using Foundry + OpenAI Agent SDK) featured an agent that could handle image uploads (like an ID document) by invoking an image-processing function. The orchestration framework doesn’t fundamentally change with multi-modality, it simply treats the vision model as another specialist agent or tool in the conversation. The ability to plug in different AI skills (text, vision, search, etc.) under a unified agent system is a big advantage of Microsoft’s approach: the agent team becomes cross-functional, each member with their own modality or expertise, collectively solving richer tasks than any single foundation model could. Reliability, Safety, and Enterprise-Grade Engineering While the basic idea of agents chatting and calling tools is elegant, productionizing this system for enterprise use brought serious engineering challenges. We needed our multi-agent system to be reliable, controllable, and secure. Here are the key areas we focused on and how we addressed them: Observability and Debugging Multi-agent chains can be complex and non-deterministic each run might involve different paths as agents make choices. Early on, we realized that treating the system as a black box was untenable. Developers and operators must be able to observe what each agent is “thinking” and doing, or else diagnosing issues would be impossible. Azure AI Foundry’s Agent Service was built with full conversation traceability in mind. Every message between agents (and to the user), every tool invocation and result, is captured in a structured thread log. We integrated this with Azure Application Insights telemetry, so one can monitor performance, latencies, errors, and even token consumption of agents in real time. This tracing proved invaluable. For example, when a complex workflow wasn’t producing the expected outcome, we could replay the entire agent conversation step by step to see where things went awry. In one instance, we found that two sub-agents were given slightly overlapping responsibilities, causing them to waste time retrieving nearly identical information. The logs and message transcripts made this immediately clear, guiding us to tighten the role definitions. Moreover, because the system logs are structured (not just free-form text), we could build automatic analysis tools like checking how often an agent hits a retry or how many cycles a conversation goes through before completion – to spot anomalies. This kind of observability was something the open-source community also highlighted as crucial; in fact, Sematic Kernel, AutoGen frameworks introduce metrics tracking and message tracing for exactly this reason. We also developed visual debugging tools. One example is the AutoGen Studio (a low-code interface from Microsoft Research) which allows developers to visually inspect agent interactions in real time, pause agents, or adjust their behavior on the fly. This interactive approach accelerates the prompt-engineering loop: one can watch agents argue or collaborate live, and intervene if needed. Such capabilities turned out to be vital for understanding emergent behaviors in multi-agent setups. Coordination Complexity and State Management As more agents come into play, keeping them coordinated and preserving shared context is hard. Early versions of agents would sometimes spawn excessive numbers of agents or get stuck in loops. For instance, one of our prototypes (before we applied strict limits) ended up in a degenerate state where two agents kept handing control back and forth without making progress. This taught us to implement guardrails and smarter orchestration policies. In Azure AI Foundry, beyond the simple connected-agent pattern, we introduced a more structured orchestration capability called Multi-Agent Workflows. This lets developers explicitly define states, transitions, and triggers in a workflow that involves multiple agents. It’s like flowcharting the high-level process that the agents should follow, including how they pass data around. We use this for long-running or highly critical processes where you want extra determinism for example, an onboarding workflow might have clearly defined phases (Verification → Provisioning → Notification) each handled by different agents, and you want to ensure the process doesn’t derail. The workflow engine enforces that the system moves to the next state only when all agents in the current state have completed and certain conditions (triggers) are met. It also provides persistence: if the process needs to wait (say, for an external event or simply because it’s a lengthy task), the state is saved and can be resumed later without losing context. These workflow features were a response to reliability needs, they give fine-grained control and error recovery in multi-agent systems that operate over extended periods. In practice, we learned to use the simpler Connected Agents approach for quick, on-the-fly delegations (it’s amazingly capable with minimal setup), and reserve Workflow Orchestration for scenarios where we must guarantee a robust sequence over minutes, hours, or days. By having both options, we can strike a balance between flexibility and control as needed. Trust, Safety, and Governance When you let AI agents act autonomously (especially if they can use tools that modify data or interact with the real world), safety is paramount. From day one, our design included enterprise-grade safety measures: Content Filtering and Policy Enforcement: All AI outputs go through content filters to catch disallowed content or potential prompt injection attacks. The Foundry Agent Service has integrated guardrails so that even if an agent tries something risky (e.g., a tool returns a sensitive info that should not be shown), policies can prevent misuse or leakage. For example, we configured financial analysis agents with rules not to output certain PII or to stop if they detect a regulatory compliance issue, handing off to a human instead. Identity and Access Control: Agents operate with identities managed via Microsoft Entra ID (Azure AD). This means every action an agent takes can be attributed and audited. Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) is enforced: an agent only has access to the data and APIs its role permits. If an agent’s credentials are compromised or misused, Azure’s standard auditing can alert us. Essentially, agents are first-class service principals in our cloud stack. Network Isolation and Compliance: For enterprise deployments, Azure AI Foundry allows agents to run in isolated networks (so they can’t arbitrarily call external services unless allowed) and to use customer-managed storage and search indices. This addresses the data governance aspect, we can ensure an agent looking up internal documents only sees what it’s supposed to, and all data stays within compliant boundaries. Auditability: As mentioned earlier, every decision an agent makes (every tool it calls, every answer it gives) is recorded. This is crucial for trust, if a multi-agent system is making business decisions, we need to be able to explain and justify those decisions later. By retaining the full reasoning trace and sources, we make the system’s work transparent and auditable. In fact, our “Deep Research” agents output not just answers but also a log of how they arrived at that answer, including citations to source material for each claim. This level of detail is a must-have in regulated industries or any high-stakes use case. Overall, baking in trust and safety by design was a non-negotiable requirement. It does introduce some overhead – e.g., being strict about content filtering can sometimes stop an agent from a creative solution until we refine its prompt or the filter thresholds, but it’s worth it for the confidence it gives to deploy these agents at scale. Performance and Cost Considerations We touched on the resource cost of multi-agent systems. Another challenge was ensuring the system runs efficiently. Without care, adding agents can linearly increase cost and latency. We mitigated this in a few ways: Parallelism: We make agents run concurrently wherever possible. Our lead agents typically fire off multiple sub-agents at once rather than sequentially waiting for one then starting the next. Also, our agents themselves can issue parallel tool calls. In fact, we enabled some of our retrieval agents to batch multiple search queries and send them all at the same time. Anthropic reported that this kind of parallelism cut their research task times by up to 90%, and we’ve observed similar dramatic speed-ups. By doing in 1 minute what a single agent might take 10 minutes to do step-by-step, we make the approach far more practical. Of course, the flip side is hitting many APIs and LLM endpoints concurrently can spike usage costs; we carefully monitor usage and recommend multi-agent mode only when needed for the problem complexity. Scaling rules and agent limits: One lesson learned was to prevent “agent sprawl.” We devised guidelines (and encoded some in prompts) about how many sub-agents to use for a given task complexity. For simple fact queries, the main agent is encouraged to handle it alone or with at most one helper; for moderately complex tasks, maybe spin up 2–3; only truly complex projects get a dozen specialists. This avoids the situation where an overzealous orchestrator might launch an army of agents and overkill the problem. These limits were informed by experimentation and echo the principle of scaling effort to the problem size. Model selection: Multi-agent systems don’t always need the largest model for every agent. We often use a mix of model sizes to optimize cost. For instance, a straightforward data extraction agent might be powered by a cheaper GPT-3.5, while the synthesis agent uses GPT-4 for the final answer quality. Foundry makes it easy to deploy a range of model endpoints (including open-source Llama-based models) and each agent can pick the one best suited. We learned that using an expensive model for a simple sub-task is wasteful; a smaller model with the right tools can do the job just as well. This mix-and-match approach helped keep our compute costs in check without sacrificing outcome quality. Lessons Learned and Best Practices Building these multi-agent systems was an iterative learning process. Here are some of the key lessons and best practices that emerged, which we believe will be useful to anyone developing their own: Let’s expand on a couple of these points: Prompt engineering for multi-agent is different: We quickly discovered that writing prompts for a team of agents is an order of magnitude more complex than for a single chatbot. Not only do you have to get each agent’s behavior right, you must shape how they interact. One principle that served us well was: “Think like your agents.” When debugging, we’d often step through the conversation from each agent’s perspective, almost role-playing as them, to see why they might be doing something silly. If an agent was repeating another’s results, maybe our instructions were too vague and they didn’t realise that sub-task was already covered. The fix would be to clarify the division of labour in the lead agent’s prompt or introduce an ordering (e.g., Agent B only runs after Agent A’s info is in, etc.). Another principle: teach the orchestrator to delegate effectively. The main agent’s prompt now includes explicit guidance on how to break down tasks and how to phrase sub-agent assignments with plenty of detail. We learned that if the lead just says “Research topic X” to two different agents, they might both do the same thing. Now, the lead agent provides distinct objectives and context to each sub-agent (e.g., focus one on recent news, another on historical data, etc.). This reduced redundancy and missed coverage dramatically. Let the AI help improve itself: One delightful surprise was that large models can be quite good at analyzing and refining their own strategies when asked. We sometimes gave an agent a chance to critique its output or plan, essentially a self-reflection step. In other cases we had a “judge” agent evaluate the final answers against criteria (accuracy, completeness, etc.) These evaluations not only gave us a score for benchmarking changes, but the judge’s feedback (being an LLM) often highlighted exactly where an agent went off track or missed something. In a sense, we used one AI to tell us how to make another AI better. This kind of meta-prompting and self-correction became a powerful tool in our development cycle, allowing faster iteration without full human-in-the-loop at every turn. Know when to simplify: Not every problem needs a fleet of agents. A big lesson was to use the simplest approach that works. If a single agent with a smart prompt can handle a task reliably, that’s fine! We reserved multi-agent mode for when there was clear added value e.g., problems requiring parallel exploration, different expertise, or lengthy reasoning that benefits from splitting into parts. This discipline kept our systems leaner and easier to maintain. It also helped us explain the value to stakeholders: we could justify the complexity by pointing to concrete gains (like a task that went from 2 hours by a single high-end model to 10 minutes by a team of agents with better results). Conclusion and Next Steps Multi-agent AI systems have moved from intriguing research demos to practical, production-ready solutions. Our journey involved close collaboration between teams such as those who built open-source frameworks like AutoGen to experiment with multi-agent interactions) and the Azure AI product teams (who turned these concepts into the robust Azure AI Foundry Agent Service). Along the way, we learned how to orchestrate LLMs at scale, how to keep them in check, and how to squeeze the most value out of agent collaboration. Today, Azure AI Foundry’s Agents platform provides a unified environment to develop, test, and deploy multi-agent systems, complete with the orchestration, observability, and safety features to make them enterprise-ready. The public preview of features like Connected Agents and Deep Research (which is essentially an advanced research agent that uses the web + analysis in a multi-step process) is already enabling customers to build “AI teams” that tackle complex workflows. This is just the beginning. We’re continuing to improve the platform with feedback from developers: upcoming releases will further tighten integration with the broader Azure ecosystem (for example, more seamless use of Azure Cognitive Search, Excel as a tool, etc.), expand the library of pre-built agent templates in the Agent Catalog (so you can start with a solid example for common scenarios), and introduce more advanced coordination patterns inspired by real-world use cases. If you’re an AI engineer or developer eager to explore multi-agent systems, now is a great time to dive in. Here are some resources to get you started: Microsoft AI Agents for Beginners - Learn all about AI Agents with this FREE curricula Azure AI Foundry Documentation – Learn more about the Agent Service and how to configure agents, tools, and workflows. Microsoft Learn Modules – step-by-step tutorial to build a connected multi-agent solution (for example, a ticket triage system) using Azure AI Foundry Agent Service. This will walk you through setting up agents and using the SDK. Microsoft MCP for Beginners: Integrating MCP Tools – Another tutorial focused on the Model Context Protocol, showing how to enable dynamic tool discovery for your agents. Azure AI Foundry Agent Catalog – Browse a growing collection of open-sourced agent examples contributed by Microsoft and partners, covering scenarios from content compliance to manufacturing optimization. These samples are great starting points to see how multi-agent code is structured in real projects. Multi-agent systems represent a significant shift in how we conceptualise AI solutions: from single brilliant assistants to teams of specialised agents working in concert. The engineering journey hasn’t been easy we navigated challenges in coordination, built new tooling for control, and refined prompts endlessly. But the end result is a new class of AI applications that are more powerful, resilient, and tunable. We hope the insights shared here help you in your own journey to build with AI agents. We’re excited to see what you will create with these technologies. As we continue to push the frontier of agentic AI (both in research and in Azure), one thing is clear: many minds – human or AI – are often better than one. Happy building! Userful References Introducing Multi-Agent Orchestration in Foundry Agent Service – Build ... Building a multimodal, multi-agent system using Azure AI Agent Service ... How we built our multi-agent research system \ Anthropic What is Azure AI Foundry Agent Service? - Azure AI Foundry Multi-Agent Systems and MCP Tools Integration with Azure AI Foundry ... Introducing Deep Research in Azure AI Foundry Agent Service AutoGen v0.4: Advancing the development of agentic AI systemsSwagger Auto-Generation on MCP Server
Would you like to generate a swagger.json directly on an MCP server on-the-fly? In many use cases, using remote MCP servers is not uncommon. In particular, if you're using Azure API Management (APIM), Azure API Center (APIC) or Copilot Studio in Power Platform, integrating with remote MCP servers is inevitable.
