The enterprise AI landscape has changed rapidly. We are no longer just building chatbots or inserting an LLM call into an existing process. Modern AI workflows are different in nature. They are systems where AI decides the next step, evaluates outcomes, and orchestrates end-to-end processes with minimal human intervention.

For Azure architects working in the Microsoft ecosystem, this shift brings both opportunity and confusion.

Microsoft now offers several platforms for AI-driven workflows:

Alongside these, there are developer frameworks such as:

This raises important questions:

This post cuts through the noise and explains what each platform actually does, where it excels, and when to use it.

Before diving into specific platforms, it is important to understand a key architectural distinction. Not every workflow that uses AI qualifies as an AI-native workflow.

Traditional workflow platforms such as Logic Apps and Power Automate have been used for years to automate business processes. Many organisations are now enhancing these workflows by adding AI actions, such as generating summaries using ChatGPT or analysing images using Computer Vision. In this model, AI is simply an additional step within an otherwise fixed workflow. The overall control flow remains predefined and rule-based.

An AI-native workflow follows a different architectural model. Here, AI is not just a task within the workflow. It becomes part of the decision-making layer. The AI evaluates the current context, decides the next step, selects the appropriate tools, and determines whether the process should continue, stop, or take an alternate path. The workflow is no longer fully hardcoded.

This represents a shift from deterministic automation to intelligent orchestration. In traditional workflows, the architect defines every possible path in advance. In AI-native workflows, the architect defines the boundaries, tools, and guardrails, while the AI dynamically determines the execution path based on the situation.

Microsoft currently offers four genuine AI-native workflow platforms, each designed for different scenarios:

Microsoft Foundry – Built for multi-agent orchestration and agent-to-agent collaboration

Logic Apps with Agent Loop – Enterprise automation with AI-driven decision-making

Microsoft Agent Framework – Code-first framework for developers needing maximum control

Microsoft Copilot Studio – Conversation-first platform deeply integrated with Microsoft 365

You might wonder about Semantic Kernel and AutoGen - frameworks that many developers have used for building agent systems. Microsoft has been clear that Agent Framework represents the unified path forward. Semantic Kernel and AutoGen remain supported, but new orchestration capabilities are primarily being developed within Agent Framework. Think of Agent Framework as the evolution and consolidation of those earlier ideas.

Microsoft Foundry represents Microsoft’s strategic investment in AI-native and agent-based architectures. It is important to understand that Foundry is not a traditional integration platform. It is specifically designed for orchestrating AI agents and managing how those agents collaborate, make decisions, and complete tasks.

Foundry provides a visual canvas that allows architects and developers to design agent workflows in a structured and intuitive way. Instead of defining workflows as a sequence of static actions, you define workflows as interactions between agents, tools, and decision points.

Foundry supports multiple orchestration patterns that align with real-world enterprise scenarios:

• Sequential workflows
Agents execute in order, with each agent building on the output of the previous agent. This is useful for structured pipelines such as document analysis, validation, and report generation.

• Human-in-the-loop workflows
The workflow pauses and waits for human approval or input before proceeding. This is essential for compliance-sensitive workflows such as financial approvals, security reviews, or operational decisions.

• Multi-agent collaboration workflows
Multiple agents collaborate by sharing context, reviewing outputs, and refining responses. This enables solutions where specialised agents work together, similar to teams with different areas of expertise.

• Custom workflows using blank canvas
Architects can design completely custom orchestration logic, defining how agents interact, when decisions are made, and how execution progresses.

One of Foundry’s most important strengths is its hybrid design model.

• Workflows can be designed visually using an intuitive canvas
• Every workflow has a corresponding YAML representation
• Developers can work directly with YAML
• Platform teams can version-control workflows using Git
• DevOps pipelines can manage deployment and lifecycle

This aligns Foundry with enterprise DevOps and Infrastructure-as-Code practices.

Different roles can work in their preferred mode:

• Architects use visual design for orchestration clarity
• Developers use YAML for precision and automation
• Platform teams use version control for governance and lifecycle management

Foundry includes capabilities required for production-scale deployments:

• Structured outputs for predictable downstream processing
• Variables for managing workflow state
• Conditional logic for dynamic execution paths
• Workflow versioning for lifecycle management
• Native integration with Azure AI services and tools

These capabilities enable Foundry to support real enterprise workloads, not just experimental use cases.

Foundry is not designed to replace enterprise integration platforms.

It is not intended for scenarios that require:

• Connecting to hundreds of enterprise systems
• Complex B2B or EDI integration patterns
• Heavy transaction processing workflows
• Long-running workflows with advanced retry and compensation logic

Platforms like Logic Apps remain the better choice for integration-heavy scenarios.

Foundry also focuses on structured orchestration rather than large-scale parallel execution. Its strength lies in intelligent coordination, not massive concurrent processing.

Foundry is the right platform when the primary architectural challenge is agent orchestration rather than system integration.

Choose Foundry when:

• Multiple AI agents need to collaborate
• Agents need to review, validate, or refine each other's outputs
• The workflow requires reasoning and decision-making
• The workflow path cannot be fully predefined
• The solution is intelligence-driven rather than integration-driven

Foundry provides the right abstraction layer for building AI-native, agent-based systems.

Azure Logic Apps has been the backbone of enterprise integration in Azure for many years. The introduction of Agent Loop workflows represents a major architectural evolution. Logic Apps is no longer limited to predefined, rule-based automation. It can now embed AI directly into the execution layer, allowing workflows to make intelligent decisions at runtime.

This brings AI-native decision-making into a platform that already provides enterprise-grade reliability, integration, and governance.

The foundation of agent loop workflows is the think–act–decide cycle. Instead of hardcoding every branch and condition, the architect provides the agent with access to tools, and the agent determines how to use them.

In this model:

• The agent evaluates the current context
• The agent selects the appropriate tool or action
• The agent executes the action using Logic Apps connectors
• The agent evaluates the outcome and decides whether to continue or stop

The tools available to the agent are standard Logic Apps capabilities, including:

• Calling REST APIs
• Querying databases
• Sending emails or Teams notifications
• Updating SharePoint or business applications
• Integrating with enterprise SaaS platforms

Instead of defining rigid workflow paths, the architect defines the available tools and boundaries. The agent dynamically determines the execution path.

Microsoft defines two primary agent workflow types in Logic Apps:

• Autonomous agent workflows
The agent executes tasks independently based on defined goals and available tools.

• Conversational agent workflows
The agent interacts with users, gathers input, and dynamically determines the next steps.

The biggest advantage of Logic Apps with agent loops is that it combines AI-driven decision-making with proven enterprise integration capabilities.

You retain all the strengths of Logic Apps, including:

• Access to hundreds of enterprise connectors
• Built-in retry policies and fault handling
• Support for long-running workflows
• Full execution history and auditability
• Enterprise-grade monitoring and alerting
• Native integration with Azure security and identity services

This makes it ideal for enterprise automation scenarios such as:

• IT incident management workflows
• Approval and escalation workflows
• IT operations automation
• Financial processing workflows
• Enterprise system orchestration

In traditional Logic Apps workflows, architects define static rules. For example:

• Expenses under ₹50,000 auto-approved
• Expenses above ₹50,000 routed to manager
• Expenses above ₹200,000 routed to director

With agent loops, the agent can evaluate broader context such as:

• Employee role and seniority
• Expense category and justification
• Budget availability
• Historical spending patterns

Based on this context, the agent makes an intelligent routing decision instead of following rigid thresholds.

Logic Apps with agent loops follows an integration-first architecture with embedded intelligence.

This means:

• One agent typically orchestrates many tools
• The platform focuses on connecting enterprise systems
• AI enhances orchestration decisions, not agent collaboration

It is not designed for complex multi-agent collaboration scenarios such as:

• Agents reviewing each other's outputs
• Agent-to-agent debates or consensus workflows
• Deep multi-agent orchestration patterns

Platforms like Microsoft Foundry are better suited for agent-first architectures.

Logic Apps with agent loop is the right choice when integration is the primary architectural requirement, and AI enhances decision-making within that integration.

Choose Logic Apps with agent loops when:

• The workflow integrates multiple enterprise systems
• The workflow requires enterprise-grade reliability and monitoring
• The workflow runs for extended durations
• Existing Logic Apps workflows need AI-driven decision-making
• Enterprise integration is the core requirement, with AI enhancing orchestration

This approach allows organisations to introduce AI-native workflows while continuing to use a mature, trusted integration platform.

Microsoft Agent Framework is designed for scenarios where architects and developers need full control over agent behaviour, orchestration logic, and execution flow. Unlike Foundry or Logic Apps, which provide visual or low-code orchestration, Agent Framework is entirely code-driven.

This makes it the preferred choice when building advanced, custom AI-native systems where orchestration requirements go beyond what visual platforms can support.

In Agent Framework, everything is defined and controlled through code.

You explicitly define:

• Agents and their capabilities
• Tools that agents can access
• Orchestration logic and execution flow
• Decision-making patterns and delegation rules
• Integration with enterprise systems and APIs

There is no visual designer or drag-and-drop interface. The architect and developer have complete ownership of the orchestration model.

This approach aligns closely with how modern distributed systems and microservices are built, where orchestration logic is implemented programmatically for maximum flexibility.

Agent Framework enables orchestration patterns that are difficult or impossible to implement in low-code platforms:

• Sequential orchestration
Agents execute in a defined order, with each agent building on the previous agent’s output.

• Concurrent orchestration
Multiple agents can execute in parallel, improving performance and enabling parallel reasoning.

• Dynamic agent handoff
Agents can delegate tasks to other agents based on capability, context, or specialisation.

• Multi-agent collaboration
Agents can interact, share context, review outputs, and collectively determine outcomes.

• Magentic orchestration patterns
Agent Framework supports advanced orchestration models inspired by AutoGen research, enabling sophisticated coordination and reasoning across multiple agents.

These capabilities make Agent Framework suitable for building complex, intelligent agent ecosystems.

Many early agent-based solutions were built using Semantic Kernel and AutoGen. Microsoft has now positioned Agent Framework as the unified and strategic orchestration framework moving forward.

From an architectural perspective:

• Semantic Kernel introduced structured AI orchestration concepts
• AutoGen introduced advanced multi-agent collaboration patterns
• Agent Framework consolidates and extends these capabilities into a unified platform

Semantic Kernel and AutoGen continue to be supported, but most new orchestration innovation is happening in Agent Framework. For new enterprise-grade implementations, Agent Framework represents the recommended path.

The code-first approach provides maximum flexibility, but it also shifts more responsibility to the engineering team.

Agent Framework does not provide:

• Visual workflow designers
• Built-in enterprise connectors like Logic Apps
• Fully managed orchestration environments
• Low-code or no-code tooling

This means the team is responsible for:

• Writing orchestration logic
• Hosting and deploying the solution
• Managing scalability and performance
• Implementing monitoring and reliability
• Maintaining the overall lifecycle

This model is similar to building custom enterprise applications, where flexibility comes with greater ownership.

Agent Framework is the right choice when orchestration requirements demand full control and advanced coordination capabilities.

Choose Agent Framework when:

• The solution requires complex multi-agent orchestration
• Parallel agent execution is required
• Agents must dynamically delegate tasks to each other
• Custom orchestration logic must be implemented
• The solution is being built as a custom AI-native application or platform
• The team is comfortable building and managing code-first solutions

Agent Framework provides the strongest foundation for building advanced, enterprise-grade AI agent systems where flexibility and control are critical.

Microsoft Copilot Studio is designed around a conversation-first architectural model. Unlike Foundry, Logic Apps, or Agent Framework, which focus on backend orchestration, Copilot Studio focuses on building AI agents that interact directly with users and execute workflows based on user intent.

It is the primary platform for building enterprise copilots such as employee assistants, IT support agents, and business process copilots.

In Copilot Studio, workflows are typically initiated through user interaction.

Common entry points include:

• Messages from users in Microsoft Teams
• Requests made within Microsoft 365 applications
• Questions asked through chat interfaces
• Inputs from integrated enterprise applications

The agent performs three key functions:

• Understands user intent using natural language
• Evaluates context, including conversation history and enterprise data
• Decides whether to execute a workflow to fulfil the request

Instead of workflows being triggered directly by backend logic, the agent determines when a workflow should run. This makes the agent the decision layer, not just the interface.

Copilot Studio introduces the concept of agent flows, which are workflows that agents can execute dynamically.

Agent flows allow the agent to:

• Retrieve data from enterprise systems
• Execute business logic
• Trigger automation processes
• Return structured results

The agent then incorporates these results into natural language responses for the user.

This creates a seamless experience where the user interacts conversationally, while the agent orchestrates backend workflows transparently.

Earlier versions of Copilot Studio focused primarily on chat-triggered workflows. The platform has now evolved to support additional triggering mechanisms.

Workflows can now be triggered by:

• Events from enterprise systems
• Scheduled triggers
• API calls
• Power Automate workflows
• Other agents

Despite this evolution, the architectural model remains human-interaction-first. Even when triggered by backend events, workflows are typically part of user-facing experiences rather than backend-only automation.

Copilot Studio also supports delegation between agents.

This allows:

• One agent to invoke specialised agents
• Separation of responsibilities between agents
• Modular and scalable copilot architectures

For example:

• An HR copilot delegates payroll questions to a payroll agent
• An IT copilot delegates device management tasks to an infrastructure agent

This enables structured, scalable enterprise copilot solutions.

Copilot Studio’s strongest advantage is its deep native integration with the Microsoft 365 ecosystem.

It integrates directly with:

• Microsoft Teams
• Outlook
• SharePoint
• Dataverse
• Microsoft 365 services

This makes it ideal for building enterprise copilots that operate within existing employee workflows.

For example, an employee can ask:

"How many leave days do I have remaining?"

The agent can:

• Retrieve employee data from Dataverse
• Apply leave policies and accrual logic
• Return the result conversationally

If the employee wants to apply for leave, the agent can trigger the appropriate workflow while maintaining conversational context.

This creates a seamless human-to-system interaction model.

Copilot Studio is designed primarily for user-centric AI experiences.

It is ideal when:

• The workflow starts with user interaction
• AI must interpret intent before triggering workflows
• Context must be maintained across interactions
• The agent acts as the primary interface to enterprise systems

It is not designed for backend-only orchestration scenarios such as:

• System-to-system batch processing
• Overnight data processing workflows
• Integration-heavy enterprise backend automation
• Long-running backend workflows without user interaction

Platforms like Logic Apps are better suited for backend orchestration.

Copilot Studio is the right platform when the architecture is centred around human interaction and conversational experiences.

Choose Copilot Studio when:

• The solution requires conversational AI interfaces
• Users interact with the system through Teams or Microsoft 365
• The agent must interpret intent before executing workflows
• The solution involves employee copilots or business assistants
• Microsoft 365 integration is a primary requirement

Copilot Studio provides the most natural and integrated way to build enterprise copilots that interact directly with users while orchestrating enterprise workflows behind the scenes.

After understanding the strengths and architectural positioning of each platform, the decision becomes much clearer. The key is to identify what is at the center of your architecture: agents, integration, code, or conversation.

Use the following decision framework as a starting point:

• Agent collaboration focus → Start with Microsoft Foundry
When your architecture involves multiple agents working together, reasoning through problems, reviewing each other’s outputs, or collaborating in structured workflows, Microsoft Foundry provides the right orchestration layer. It is designed specifically for agent-to-agent coordination.

• Enterprise automation with AI-driven decisions → Use Logic Apps with Agent Loop
When your workflow integrates multiple enterprise systems, relies on connectors, runs for extended durations, and requires enterprise-grade reliability, Logic Apps is the right foundation. The agent loop allows AI to make intelligent decisions while Logic Apps handles integration, monitoring, and execution.

• Maximum control and complex multi-agent behaviour → Use Microsoft Agent Framework
When your solution requires parallel agent execution, dynamic delegation between agents, custom orchestration logic, or advanced coordination patterns, Agent Framework provides the flexibility and control required. This is the right choice for code-first, enterprise-grade AI systems.

• User interaction and Microsoft 365 integration focus → Use Copilot Studio
When workflows begin with user interaction, operate within Microsoft Teams or Microsoft 365, and require conversational interfaces, Copilot Studio is purpose-built for these scenarios. It enables rapid development of enterprise copilots with deep Microsoft 365 integration.

A simple way to remember this from an architectural perspective:

• Foundry → Agent orchestration
• Logic Apps → Enterprise integration with AI decisions
• Agent Framework → Full control with code-first orchestration
• Copilot Studio → Conversation-first enterprise copilots

Cost is an important architectural factor when selecting an AI-native workflow platform. Each platform follows a different pricing model based on how it is designed and used. Understanding these models helps architects align platform choice with workload scale, usage patterns, and budget predictability.

The most important principle to remember is this: you are not just paying for AI model usage, but also for orchestration, infrastructure, integration, and user access, depending on the platform.

Microsoft Foundry pricing is primarily driven by agent execution and AI model usage.

Costs are influenced by:

• Number of agent workflow executions
• Complexity of orchestration logic
• Number of agents involved per workflow
• AI model usage and token consumption
• Tool invocations and external API calls

As agent complexity and execution frequency increase, costs scale accordingly.

Typical architectural cost characteristics:

• Highly scalable with usage
• No fixed licensing required
• Ideal for backend agent orchestration scenarios
• Costs closely aligned with actual execution volume

For moderate workloads such as thousands of agent interactions per month, costs typically fall within a predictable operational range, depending on model selection and orchestration complexity.

Logic Apps follows a consumption-based pricing model, where you pay per workflow action execution.

Cost components include:

• Logic Apps action execution costs
• Connector usage
• Workflow execution frequency
• AI model usage for agent decision-making
• Data transfer and integration operations

The key architectural advantage is cost efficiency for integration-heavy workflows.

Typical characteristics:

• Very cost-effective for enterprise automation
• Predictable cost per workflow execution
• AI costs are incremental on top of integration costs
• Ideal for large-scale enterprise integration scenarios

This makes Logic Apps one of the most cost-efficient options when integration is the primary workload.

Agent Framework follows a build-and-host model. There is no platform licensing cost, but you are responsible for the hosting infrastructure and AI usage costs.

Cost components include:

• Hosting infrastructure such as Azure App Service, Container Instances, or Kubernetes
• Compute costs for running agent services
• AI model token consumption
• Storage, networking, and monitoring

Architectural implications:

• Maximum flexibility in infrastructure design
• Full control over performance and scaling
• Costs depend entirely on hosting and usage patterns
• Requires proper infrastructure planning and optimisation

This model is best suited for organisations already operating application hosting platforms.

Copilot Studio follows a license-based pricing model, typically structured per user or per tenant.

Cost components include:

• Per-user or per-tenant licensing
• Included AI capabilities within the license
• Additional integration or premium connector costs if applicable

Architectural advantages:

• Predictable and stable pricing
• Simplified cost management
• No need to manage infrastructure
• Ideal for employee-facing copilots

This model works well when deploying copilots across enterprise users, where predictable operational cost is preferred over consumption-based variability.

Each platform aligns with a different architectural and cost model:

• Foundry → Consumption-based agent orchestration cost
• Logic Apps → Low-cost enterprise integration plus AI usage
• Agent Framework → Infrastructure cost plus AI consumption
• Copilot Studio → License-based predictable user cost

The most important insight is this: these platforms are not competing with each other. Each platform is designed to solve a specific architectural problem.

• Microsoft Foundry is built for agent orchestration, where multiple agents collaborate, reason, and coordinate to complete complex tasks.
• Logic Apps with Agent Loop is built for enterprise integration, where AI enhances decision-making within reliable, connector-driven workflows.
• Microsoft Agent Framework is built for maximum flexibility, where developers need full control over orchestration, execution, and coordination logic.
• Copilot Studio is built for conversation-first experiences, where AI agents interact directly with users within Microsoft 365 environments.

The architectural decision becomes much simpler when you focus on the nature of the problem rather than the platform itself.

Instead of asking, “Which platform is best?”, ask:

• Is the core requirement agent collaboration?
• Is the core requirement enterprise system integration?
• Is the core requirement full programmatic control?
• Is the core requirement user interaction and conversational experience?

The answer to these questions naturally leads you to the right platform.

The AI-native workflow landscape is evolving rapidly. New capabilities are being introduced, platforms continue to expand, and architectural patterns are still maturing. However, the fundamental architectural drivers remain consistent: agent orchestration, enterprise integration, code-first control, and human-centric interaction.

As an architect, the correct approach is always to start with the problem. Clearly define the orchestration model, integration requirements, control requirements, and user interaction model. Once these are understood, selecting the appropriate platform becomes a straightforward architectural decision.

Start with the problem. Define the architecture. Then select the platform that aligns with that architecture.

If you found this useful, tap Subscribe at the bottom of the page to get future updates straight to your inbox.