Identify AI model components and configurations
How a model turns a prompt into a completion
Feed a model the fragment "I heard a dog" and it continues with "bark", because "heard" and "dog" are the strongest clues about what comes next. If you have ever typed a question into a chat assistant and read the reply, you have already met that behavior from the outside; this page is the machinery underneath it, and the Python listings later ask nothing of you beyond reading a dictionary literal. The other pages in this domain ask which responsible-AI principle governs a solution and which workload family a scenario belongs to; this one stays inside the model. Work through it and you can take a requirement and settle the three decisions an exam question sets beside it: which model class, which access path, and which setting.
Tokens are the units a model actually reads
A model does not work in words. A tokenizer first breaks the text into tokens: whole words, sub-words such as the "un" in "unbelievable" and "unlikely", punctuation, and other commonly used sequences of characters. Each distinct token gets a unique integer identifier, and a current model's vocabulary runs to hundreds of thousands of them, built from large volumes of training text (tokenization in large language models[1]). Every limit and every per-token charge later on this page is counted in tokens, never in words, so a 400-word prompt and a 400-token prompt are different quantities.
Embeddings give tokens a position in a meaning space
Each token starts as a vector, an array of numeric values. A transformer model converts those starting vectors into ones that carry meaning through two blocks: an encoder block that creates the embeddings by applying a technique called attention, and a decoder block that uses those embeddings to determine the next most probable token in a sequence. Attention looks at each token in the context of the tokens around it and weights those neighbors by how much they influence it, which is why "heard" and "dog" count for more than "I" or "a" when the model considers what follows. The result is an embedding, a vector whose direction encodes meaning: tokens used in similar contexts point in similar directions, and that closeness is measured as cosine similarity. Keep that definition close, because embeddings return later as a model class you can call directly.
Generation is a loop, not a lookup
The decoder predicts one token, that token is appended to the sequence, and the process repeats with the longer sequence as its context until the decoder predicts that the sequence has ended. Nothing in that loop retrieves a stored answer keyed to your prompt, which is the most common misreading of these models: the response is assembled one token at a time out of probabilities, so the same prompt can produce different wording on different runs. The figure below traces a single pass around that loop.
Training happened once; a request only applies it
The probabilities come from parameters fixed during training, when the model was exposed to large volumes of text and iteratively learned which tokens occur together and in similar contexts. At request time, which is called inference, the model applies those learned patterns and changes nothing about itself. A deployed model therefore does not retrain on user prompts, and it does not check a generated claim against a factual database as part of answering, which is why a wrong answer is a grounding problem or a model-choice problem rather than a settings problem.
The short version: tokens in, one probable token out, appended, repeat. Everything else on this page is either which model runs that loop or how much room and randomness it gets.
What you send: the chat transcript and its roles
This section covers the shape of the request itself, because a chat model does not accept one unstructured string. It accepts an ordered transcript of messages, each labeled with a role, and returns a model-generated message; that format is what supports multi-turn conversation and it also works well for tasks that are not conversations at all (work with chat completion models[2]).
Three roles, three jobs
- System. The system message sits at the beginning of the array and provides the initial instructions to the model: a brief description of the assistant, personality traits, rules you want followed, and data the model needs, such as relevant questions from an FAQ. It is optional, but Microsoft's guidance is to include at least a basic one for the best results. On reasoning models a developer message is functionally the same as a system message, and you should not use both in one request (reasoning models[3]).
- User. The request itself. End the transcript with a user message, because that is what signals it is the assistant's turn to respond.
- Assistant. What the model said, or what you want a good answer to look like. Seeding assistant messages alongside user messages is how few-shot examples are supplied.
Application-wide rules belong in the system message, not the assistant role. It is an easy slip to make, because assistant content does influence later turns, but an instruction parked there reads as one more example turn rather than as a standing constraint on behavior.
Listing 1: a transcript carrying one seeded example exchange
The listing below puts the three roles just described into a single transcript. It is complete as shown; nothing has been cut. The role key is the structure the model reads, and the content key holds the text for that turn.
messages = [
# Standing behavior and constraints go here, not in an assistant turn.
{"role": "system", "content": "Assistant helps users answer tax-related questions."},
# A user/assistant pair used as a few-shot example of the answer style.
{"role": "user", "content": "When do I need to file my taxes by?"},
{"role": "assistant", "content": "Check the current individual filing deadline on the IRS website."},
# The transcript ends on a user turn, which is what prompts a response.
{"role": "user", "content": "How can I check the status of my tax refund?"},
]
The model keeps no memory between calls
Every request sends the running transcript again. Because the model has no memory, an application that stops resending earlier turns loses the context of the previous questions and answers, so conversation state is the caller's job rather than the model's. The same message format also covers non-chat work: an entity-extraction prompt is a system message describing the JSON shape to return plus a user message holding the raw text.
Two things to take from this: the roles are a contract about what kind of content each message is, and the transcript you resend on every turn is the thing that spends the budget described next.
The context window is one shared token budget
A model's context window is the token budget for a single request, and the messages you send and the tokens the model generates both spend it. That one sentence settles most exam questions in this area, so start there rather than with the arithmetic.
What draws on the budget
Three kinds of token draw on the same window:
| Token kind | Where it comes from | Visible to the user |
|---|---|---|
| Input tokens | The transcript you send, including the system message and every earlier turn | Yes |
| Output tokens | The assistant message the model generates | Yes |
| Reasoning tokens | Hidden intermediate work on reasoning models, reported under completion_tokens_details | No |
Reasoning tokens are the ones that surprise people. They are not returned as part of the message content, but they are used by the model to help produce the final answer, and a higher reasoning_effort setting generally produces more of them (reasoning models[3]). A request can therefore consume far more generated tokens than the visible answer suggests.
Because everything shares one window, the published input maximum and output maximum for a model are not two independent allowances you can each spend in full. Filling the input side leaves less headroom for generation, and the operative rule from Microsoft's chat-completions guidance is that the combined count of your messages plus the requested output tokens must stay within the model's limit (managing conversations[2]). Per-model limits are published on the models reference and change as models are added, so treat the specific numbers as a lookup rather than something to memorize. The figure below puts a short prompt beside a long one inside the same window.
What happens at the boundary is described more than one way
Microsoft's documentation does not give a single answer here, so do not learn one. The chat-completions guidance states that a request whose combined count exceeds the model's limit fails, and the same page offers the Responses API as a way to have truncation and management of the conversation history handled for you. Its own sample instead trims the transcript client-side, deleting the oldest non-system messages until the request fits, and notes that this gradually degrades quality as the model loses the earlier parts of the conversation. All three are documented; what they agree on is that the budget is something an application manages deliberately, not something that manages itself by default.
Practical consequences
- Track the token count of a growing conversation rather than assuming it stays small.
- Preserve the system message when trimming, since it carries the standing instructions.
- Alternatively, cap a conversation at a number of turns and start a fresh one, which restores the full budget instead of degrading it.
- Expect a response that stops because it hit a length ceiling to be reported as such, distinct from a response that stopped because the model finished.
The conclusion for the exam: one window, several things drawing on it, and no automatic rescue you can name with confidence.
Choosing a model by capability, with evidence
You have a requirement in hand, say ranking support articles by meaning rather than by keyword, and a catalog of models in front of you. The catalog will not narrow itself, so work through two questions in this order before you look at any model name: what must the solution hand back, and what will the prompt hand in. Output settles the model class; what kind of content the prompt hands in, its modality, settles whether one kind of input is enough. The workloads page runs a similar test one level up, reading a scenario for the workload family it belongs to; the question here is the narrower one of which model inside that family returns the required shape.
The model classes you are expected to tell apart
The comparison table at the top of this page sets out the four classes AI-901 leans on hardest. Microsoft's catalog guidance divides the same space more finely, grouping models by the task they perform, including the following (explore the model catalog[4]); read it as a zoom-in on those four rather than a rival list. The catalog labels a few classes differently, notably chat completion for chat models and image analysis for multimodal models, and this page keeps one name per class throughout. The list is representative rather than exhaustive, and the catalog gains new categories over time.
| Class | Returns | Reach for it when |
|---|---|---|
| Chat model | A generated assistant message | The answer is newly written natural language |
| Reasoning model | A generated answer, with the model breaking the problem into steps | Mathematics, coding, science, strategy, and similar multi-step problems |
| Embedding model | A numerical representation of the input | Semantic search, recommendations, and retrieval by meaning rather than exact keywords |
| Image-generation model | A newly created image | Marketing material, illustrations, or design mockups from a description |
| Video-generation model | Newly created video content | Video from a text description |
| Multimodal model | Natural language about supplied images | Prompts that include images to be interpreted |
| Text-to-speech model | Synthesized speech | Reading text aloud |
| Speech-to-text model | A transcription | Turning spoken audio into text |
Size is a second axis, not a replacement for the first. Large language models suit deep reasoning, complex content generation, and extensive context understanding while demanding more computational resources; small language models handle common natural language tasks more cheaply and can run on lower-end hardware or edge devices. Pick the class first, then the size.
Input modality is a separate check
A model that returns text is not automatically a model that accepts images. When a prompt combines modalities, the requirement is a multimodal model whose model card lists every input type you intend to supply, and the fact that you want a text answer back tells you nothing about what the model will accept going in. This is the single most reliable trap in this objective, so make the model card the deciding evidence rather than the output format.
The evidence surfaces in the Foundry portal
Three surfaces answer three different questions, and mixing them up costs marks:
- Catalog filters narrow the field. The catalog supports keyword search plus filters on collection, capabilities such as reasoning, tool calling, and multimodal processing, source, inference tasks, fine-tuning methods, and industry. The product documentation lists a partly different set, adding region, deployment options, deployment SKU, lifecycle stage, and supported features (model catalog capabilities[5]). The two lists overlap without matching, so learn the kinds of filter rather than one canonical list.
- The model card confirms a single candidate. It shows the provider, capabilities, benchmark metrics, responsible AI considerations, and deployment options, organized in the portal as quick facts plus Details, Deployments, Benchmarks, and License tabs. Supported data types live on the Details tab, which is where the multimodal check above is settled.
- The model leaderboard (preview) and Compare models rank and contrast candidates. The leaderboard sorts on quality, safety, estimated cost, and throughput; trade-off charts plot two of those metrics against each other; leaderboards by scenario rank models for a capability such as reasoning, coding, or question answering. Compare models opens up to three models side by side across performance benchmarks, model details including context window, supported endpoints, and feature support (compare models using the model leaderboard[6]).
Evaluators are a different tool for a different job. They score the outputs of a solution you have built; they do not tell you which candidate model costs less or supports vision. When a question asks how to compare candidate models on capability and cost, the leaderboard and Compare models are the answer.
Read benchmarks with their limits attached
Benchmark data is not available for all models in the catalog, and a model without a Benchmarks tab simply has no published results yet. Scores are normalized indexes: higher is better for quality and safety, while for cost and throughput a lower estimated cost and a higher throughput are generally preferred. Public benchmarks use standardized datasets and might not reflect performance on your own data, which is what the separate evaluation workflow exists for.
One number worth not memorizing: Microsoft's own pages currently give different sizes for the catalog, one saying over 1,900 models and another over 10,000. The size is not the testable fact; the selection method is.
So the sequence is output class, then input modality, then evidence from the card and the leaderboard. Nothing about that order changes with the model of the month.
From catalog entry to a callable endpoint
You have settled on a model, your client code is open, and there is still no address to send a request to. Selecting a model in the catalog does not make it callable, and adding it to a collection does not create an endpoint. Something has to hand your application that address, and Foundry offers more than one way to get one. Read the options and their selection criteria first; the mechanics of each follow.
- Instant access (preview) lets you call a supported model by name with no deployment at all. It fits getting started, prototyping, and trying a model the day it is released.
- A deployment creates a named inference target that you then address by its deployment name. It fits everything that needs reserved capacity, data residency, per-model content filtering, version pinning, quota partitioning, or a fine-tuned model.
- Managed compute (preview) runs model weights on dedicated managed GPU capacity. It fits open-source, partner, industry, and custom-weight models that are not served from a Microsoft-hosted endpoint.
Instant access, and what it gives up
With instant access you pass a supported model name where you would otherwise pass a deployment name, using the same API, SDK, and client (instant access to models[7]). It draws on a per-model global quota pool that is separate from the regional quota standard deployments use, and by default it resolves to the latest evergreen version unless you append a version suffix to pin one. During preview it is limited to projects in West US 3, fine-tuned models are not supported, and guardrails, which are the safety controls applied around a model, along with custom responsible-AI policies and content filters, cannot be configured per model. If an existing deployment is named the same as a model, the deployment wins and instant access for that name is unavailable in that project.
Deployments, and the type you pick with them
Creating a deployment means choosing a deployment type, and that choice determines where your data is processed, how you pay, and the performance characteristics you get (deployment types[8]). The categories are standard, which is pay-per-token, and provisioned, which is reserved capacity bought as provisioned throughput units; within each you choose global, data zone, or single-region processing.
| Deployment type | Data processing | Billing |
|---|---|---|
| Global Standard | Any Azure region | Pay-per-token |
| Data Zone Standard | Within the specified data zone (US, EU, or APAC) | Pay-per-token |
| Standard | The deployment region only | Pay-per-token |
| Global Provisioned | Any Azure region | Reserved provisioned throughput units |
| Regional Provisioned | The deployment region only | Reserved provisioned throughput units |
| Global Batch and Data Zone Batch | Any region, or within the data zone | Discounted, with a 24-hour target turnaround |
| Developer | Any Azure region | Pay-per-token, fine-tuned model evaluation only |
The pattern behind the table is worth more than the rows: the first word of the type names the data-processing scope, and the second names the billing model. The table shows the common combinations rather than every published SKU, and because the naming is generative, a type you have not met before, such as Data Zone Provisioned, decodes the same way. Data stored at rest stays in the designated Azure geography for every type; it is inferencing data whose processing location varies. Not every model supports every type, and a Developer deployment has a fixed 24-hour lifetime with no service-level agreement.
Two names in that table collide with names used elsewhere, and a question can turn on which one is meant. Standard with a capital S is a single deployment type, the single-region pay-per-token one, whereas standard deployment in a Foundry resource is the broader access path under which those deployment types are offered. The Developer deployment type likewise has nothing to do with the developer message role described earlier.
Among the paths that use a deployment, standard deployment in a Foundry resource, the primary resource type for new Foundry projects, is documented as the preferred and most capable option, supporting the widest range of deployment types, regional, data zone, or global processing, built-in and customizable content filtering, keyless authentication with Microsoft Entra ID, private networking, and provisioned throughput (deployment overview[9]). Reaching for dedicated virtual machines because dedicated sounds more capable inverts the actual guidance.
Managed compute, and what it costs
Managed compute (preview) is a managed GPU platform-as-a-service that hosts open-source and custom-weight models on dedicated capacity, with no virtual machines, clusters, or serving runtimes for you to own. Billing is hourly per accelerator SKU rather than per token, and auto-scale with an idle timeout lets a deployment scale to zero so billing stops. Quota is granted per accelerator SKU per region through the Foundry quota process and is separate from Azure virtual machine (VM) quota, so existing VM quota cannot be applied to it. In public preview it is available for global deployment only, and content filtering is not available through it; you use the Azure AI Content Safety APIs instead. Example collections that require it include Hugging Face models, NVIDIA inference microservices, industry models, and custom models. The figure below groups the paths by who holds the capacity.
Two shapes, several names
Microsoft's pages currently label and count these paths differently. The deployment overview describes standard deployment in Foundry resources alongside managed compute; the model catalog overview describes managed compute alongside serverless deployments, using that second name for the Microsoft-hosted, API-based path where you are billed for inputs and outputs, typically in tokens. Because the naming and the totals do not line up across pages, learn the two hosting-and-billing shapes, a framing used on this page rather than Microsoft's own vocabulary, and treat any specific count as unsafe: either Microsoft hosts the model and you pay for what you send and receive, or model weights run on capacity dedicated to you and you pay for the time it is up.
Request-time parameters you configure per call
Your prototype answers well but rambles, and asking it the same question twice gives two different answers. Both complaints are settings. Request parameters change how the model samples and how long it may answer; they do not change what it knows, and holding those two clauses together explains every right answer in this part of the objective.
The Foundry model playground is where you meet them first: it lets you configure parameters such as temperature, top_p, and max_tokens, inject system prompts, and enable tools, then export the equivalent code (Foundry playgrounds[10]). What you tune there is what you send in a request.
The three settings and what each one moves
| Setting | What it changes | Reach for it when | What it will not do |
|---|---|---|---|
| Temperature | How random token selection is; lower is more focused and consistent, higher is more varied | Answers wander between runs, or you want more variety | Change how long a response may be |
| Top P | Caps the pool at the most probable tokens whose combined probability reaches a chosen mass (nucleus sampling), another way to steer the same randomness | You would rather bound the probability mass than set a temperature | Compound usefully with Temperature; adjust one or the other |
| Max Completion Tokens | An upper bound on the generated-token budget for the response | A response must fit a length, or generated-token cost must be bounded | Guarantee the model uses the full amount |
Temperature and Top P steer the same behavior by different means, so the normal practice is to adjust one of them in a request rather than both. Neither one is a length control; that is a separate lever with a separate name, which is exactly the pair most often swapped in exam options.
Max Completion Tokens is a ceiling, including the invisible part
The portal label is Max Completion Tokens; in code the parameter name depends on the surface. Reasoning models take max_completion_tokens on the Chat Completions API and max_output_tokens on the Responses API (reasoning models[3]). Whichever name applies, the value bounds generated tokens, and on applicable models that budget covers the hidden reasoning tokens described earlier as well as the visible answer. Set it too low on a reasoning model and the reply can be truncated before any visible text appears.
A response carries a finish reason, and length means the output was incomplete because of that parameter or the model's own token limit, as distinct from stop, which means the model finished (finish reasons[2]). That is a request that ran and returned a shortened answer, a different outcome from the over-budget request in the context-window section, where the combined count is rejected before anything is generated. Microsoft's guidance is to set the value high enough for the expected response so the model does not stop before reaching the end of its message.
Listing 2: a request that sets both kinds of control
This is the same transcript idea as Listing 1, now sent through a client with the two settings attached. Only the call is shown; the client construction and the credential setup are omitted at the marked point.
# ... client construction omitted ...
response = client.chat.completions.create(
model="YOUR-DEPLOYMENT-NAME", # the deployment name from the access path above
messages=conversation, # the role-labeled transcript from Listing 1
temperature=0.7, # sampling: lower is more consistent
max_completion_tokens=250 # ceiling on generated tokens, not a target
)
What these settings are not for
Parameters do not add knowledge, and they do not moderate content. A wrong-but-fluent answer is addressed by grounding the model on your own sources or choosing a different model. Harmful content is addressed by content filtering and guardrails attached to a deployment, which is also why instant access, where those are not configurable per model, is positioned for prototyping rather than for a workload with specific filtering requirements. Where data is processed is settled by the deployment type, not by anything in the request body.
The compact form: temperature and Top P for how it chooses, Max Completion Tokens for how far it goes, and neither for what it knows or what it is allowed to say.
How AI-901 phrases questions about models
Questions on this objective rarely ask what a term means. They describe a situation and ask which model, which access path, or which setting fits it, and the wrong options are usually adjacent facts that are true about something else. This section covers the recurring stems and the reason each distractor fails.
Stem cues and the answer they point to
| The stem says | Correct choice | The option that looks right |
|---|---|---|
| Compare passages by meaning, cluster them, or retrieve by similarity | An embedding model | An image-generation model, because it also produces a representation |
| Compose a new natural-language answer to a user question | A chat completion model | Sentiment analysis or another text-analysis feature |
| The prompt includes an image to interpret | A multimodal model whose card lists image input | Any text-output model, on the assumption that output modality settles input |
| Compare candidate models on capability and estimated cost | The model leaderboard (preview) and Compare models | The evaluator catalog, which scores solution outputs |
| Make a catalog model callable | Create a deployment, or use instant access (preview) | Add the model to a project collection |
| Host open-source or custom model weights | Managed compute (preview) | Standard deployment, which does not host arbitrary weights |
| Keep a response within a length or generated-token cost limit | Max Completion Tokens | Temperature, which changes randomness |
| Make answers more consistent between runs | Lower Temperature, or use Top P | Raise Max Completion Tokens |
Recurring misconceptions worth naming
- The model looks up a stored answer. It generates one token at a time from probabilities; there is no keyed retrieval of a matching response.
- The deployment retrains on user prompts. Training produced the parameters once; inference applies them and changes nothing.
- Input and output limits are additive. They share one context window, so spending the input allowance in full leaves less room for the answer, not the full output allowance.
- Application-wide rules belong in an assistant message. They belong in the system message; assistant content reads as example output.
- An embedding is the text handed back to the user. It is a numerical vector; the natural-language reply is a completion.
- Managed compute is the safer default because dedicated hardware means more features. Standard deployment in a Foundry resource is documented as the preferred and most capable path.
- A serverless deployment installs weights on your own virtual machines and bills by core-hour. That description belongs to managed compute; the Microsoft-hosted path bills for inputs and outputs, typically in tokens.
Where the objective stops
The published skills outline for this objective covers how generative AI models work, identifying an appropriate model based on capabilities, and identifying appropriate deployment options and configuration parameters (AI-901 study guide[11]). Advanced data science, model training, and MLOps are named as out of scope for this exam and belong to the associate-level certifications, so a question that appears to require designing a training run is almost certainly testing something else, usually the selection or configuration decision sitting next to it.
A final caution on counts. Where two official pages disagree on a number, such as how many deployment options exist or how many models the catalog holds, an exam answer keyed to the number is a guess. Answer from the shapes: what the model returns, who hosts it, how it is billed, and which setting moves which behavior.
Model classes: what each one accepts and returns
| Comparison point | Chat model | Embedding model | Multimodal model | Image-generation model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| What it accepts | An ordered transcript of role-labeled messages | Content to encode, most commonly text | The input types its model card lists, such as text plus images | A text prompt, or an image plus an editing instruction |
| What it returns | A generated assistant message | A numerical vector representing semantic meaning | A generated response reasoned over the combined input | Newly created image content |
| Fits when you need | Instruction following, question answering, multi-turn text | Semantic similarity, clustering, or similarity search | Reasoning over more than one modality in one prompt | Original visual content described in words |
| Wrong choice when | The result must be a vector for comparison | The result must be newly generated natural language | Only text is supplied and only text is needed | You need labels or coordinates for pixels you already have |
| Check on the model card | Supported inference task and context window | Supported data types | That every required input type is listed | Lifecycle status and license terms |
Decision tree
Sharp facts the exam loves — give these one last read before exam day.
Cheat sheet
Sharp facts the exam loves — scan these before test day.
- Large language models generate output iteratively as tokens
A tokenizer breaks input text into tokens, and a large language model selects an output token based on the input sequence. The selected token is appended to the sequence and becomes context for selecting the next token, so generation proceeds one token at a time.
Trap The model retrieves a complete, stored answer that exactly matches the prompt.
22 questions test this
- You are onboarding a new developer to a Microsoft Foundry project that contains a chat model deployment. The developer has watched the deployment return fluent answers in the playground and asks where
- A stakeholder requires every product description that your Microsoft Foundry chat deployment generates to run to about sixty words. A developer plans to guarantee that by setting the maximum number of
- Two requests arrive at the same Microsoft Foundry chat model deployment. The first sends a long transcript and asks for a one-sentence reply. The second sends a short instruction and asks for a multi-
- You are developing a Microsoft Foundry chat application for a hardware retailer. Customer messages contain frequent misspellings and internal part codes such as HX4412RQ that appear in no public text,
- You deploy a chat model in a Microsoft Foundry project and open it in the playground. You open a fresh chat before each of three submissions of exactly the same prompt and keep a nonzero Temperature s
- You call a Microsoft Foundry chat model deployment and inspect the usage details returned with the response. The prompt you sent is a 30-word English sentence that contains punctuation and an unusual
- You submit a paragraph of English prose to a chat model deployment in a Microsoft Foundry project. To reproduce the model's input preprocessing in a local validation pipeline, what should your applica
- During a design review for a Microsoft Foundry chat application, a stakeholder asks whether the deployed model gradually learns your company's internal terminology as employees keep sending prompts th
- A Microsoft Foundry chat model deployment answers an internal policy question with fluent, confident text that describes a policy your company has never published. The prompt supplied no company docum
- Your Microsoft Foundry chat application serves users in English, German, and Japanese from one deployment. To forecast token usage, a teammate proposes dividing each message's character count by a sin
- You estimate the running cost of a Microsoft Foundry chat application before it goes live. Some requests send a short prompt and receive a long, detailed answer, while other requests send a long promp
- Your team is tuning a Microsoft Foundry chat application after one answer came back far longer than expected. You need the number of tokens the model actually produced for that single answer, separate
- You are new to generative AI. You deploy a chat model in a Microsoft Foundry project and send one prompt from the playground. The model returns a full paragraph of text, and you must explain to your t
- A nightly job on a Microsoft Foundry chat model deployment summarizes thousands of archived documents and writes every summary to storage. No person reads the output while it is being produced. A deve
- You build a customer-facing chat app on a Microsoft Foundry chat model deployment. Users report that the app feels unresponsive because nothing appears on screen until the entire answer is finished. M
- You compare two chat model deployments in a Microsoft Foundry project for an application that submits long contracts. Both models publish the same maximum token count, yet one of them accepts noticeab
- You plan a Microsoft Foundry application that sends long meeting transcripts to a chat model deployment and asks for a detailed written summary of each one. Every request must stay inside the deployed
- A customer phrases a question to your Microsoft Foundry chat application in wording that appears nowhere in the model's training data, and the deployment still returns a sensible answer. A colleague c
- A Microsoft Foundry chat model deployment writes a five-paragraph product overview in a single response. The first sentence states an incorrect release year, and every later paragraph repeats that sam
- Your Python application calls a Microsoft Foundry chat model deployment to summarize support tickets. One returned summary ends in the middle of a sentence, and the response payload reports a finish_r
- You build a Microsoft Foundry application that drafts customer replies with a chat model deployment. Every draft must be screened against your company's tone rules before an agent sees it, and the mod
- You are writing a Python application that sends customer feedback forms to a Microsoft Foundry chat model deployment. A teammate suggests splitting each form into a list of individual words in your ow
- Training teaches a language model statistical and semantic token relationships
During training, a large language model analyzes how tokens occur together and in similar contexts, encoding learned relationships in its parameters. At inference time, it applies those learned patterns to the prompt; it does not verify each generated claim against a factual database by default.
Trap The deployment retrains the model on every user prompt before returning a response.
12 questions test this
- You are onboarding a new developer to a Microsoft Foundry project that contains a chat model deployment. The developer has watched the deployment return fluent answers in the playground and asks where
- A stakeholder plans to use a Microsoft Foundry chat model deployment as the only source of answers about Azure capabilities announced in the past month. The application will send the user's question a
- A Microsoft Foundry chat model deployment answers a question about industry regulation and closes with a report title, publisher, and page number. Your application sent no documents with the prompt, a
- A compliance reviewer asks whether a Microsoft Foundry chat model deployment checks each statement it generates against a factual source before the response is returned. The application sends the user
- Your team wants a chat model in a Microsoft Foundry project to write in your company's house style. One option is to include a set of approved examples in every prompt, and the other is to fine-tune t
- A privacy reviewer audits a Microsoft Foundry project that contains a chat model deployment. The reviewer must describe, in a compliance report, what the deployed model itself contains and how it can
- A Microsoft Foundry chat model deployment serves the same internal application in English and in Welsh. Reviewers who read both languages rate the English answers as accurate and well phrased, while t
- A Microsoft Foundry chat model deployment has served an internal application for six months, and your team has changed neither the application code nor any request settings. Users now report that answ
- Your team deploys a small language model from the Microsoft Foundry model catalog for an internal assistant. The assistant answers a narrow product FAQ well and responds quickly, but its answers to wi
- Your company keeps thousands of internal engineering standards in a document library, and none of them are published outside the company. A Microsoft Foundry chat model deployment must answer engineer
- Your Microsoft Foundry application summarizes insurance claim documents with a chat model deployment and shows each summary to a claims handler. Some summaries state details that the source document d
- A customer phrases a question to your Microsoft Foundry chat application in wording that appears nowhere in the model's training data, and the deployment still returns a sensible answer. A colleague c
A model's context window limits the tokens it can process for a request. Input tokens, generated output tokens, and any reasoning tokens consume the available context budget, so a longer prompt can leave less room for generation.
Trap Input and output token limits are always additive, so using the full input limit leaves the full output limit available.
21 questions test this
- Your application sends a full contract to a Foundry model deployment in a single request and asks for a clause-by-clause review. Requests fail because the prompt and the expected review together excee
- A Foundry chat application includes a product data set as supporting content in every prompt. The data barely fits, leaving almost no room for the model's answer. You must send the same fields and row
- You maintain a lightweight Python chat app that calls a Foundry model deployment through the Chat Completions API. Last week the team attached twelve function tool definitions to every request. Conver
- You call a reasoning model deployment in a Microsoft Foundry project by using the Chat Completions API. You set max_completion_tokens to a small value to control cost. Some responses come back with no
- A Foundry chat app prepends the same long instruction block to every Chat Completions request. Monitoring shows a large cached_tokens value and a lower per-request cost than before. Sessions still run
- You are choosing a Foundry model deployment for an application that sends long documents to the model. In the Foundry Models documentation, the Context Window entry for the model lists a total token v
- You are developing a Python application that summarizes long support-ticket threads by using a chat model deployment in Microsoft Foundry. The application pastes an entire thread into the prompt and s
- A Foundry chat application logs the prompt token count of every request. Within a single conversation that count rises steadily, although users type messages of roughly the same length each turn. Whic
- A Foundry chat app grounds every answer in an Azure AI Search index. For each question the app pastes the 50 highest-ranked chunks into the prompt. Answers are now truncated, and the prompt token coun
- You must classify 500 short support tickets with a single Foundry chat model deployment. Pasting all 500 tickets into one prompt exceeds the model's context window. Each ticket needs its own one-line
- You are grounding a Foundry chat assistant in a product manual that is much larger than the model's context window. The assistant must be able to answer questions about any section of the manual. What
- You are building a Python chat application on a Foundry model deployment. Each turn appends the user message and the assistant reply to the messages list, and long sessions eventually exceed the model
- Your Python app sends a shelf photo and a short question to a vision-enabled Foundry model deployment on every call. Each request now leaves too little of the context budget for the model's written an
- You maintain a Foundry chat assistant that handles support tickets. Each user works one ticket at a time, and consecutive tickets are unrelated to each other. The application keeps every earlier ticke
- Your team is building a multi-turn assistant on a Microsoft Foundry model deployment. The developers do not want to write their own code to count tokens and trim old turns as conversations approach th
- A Foundry chat assistant uses a long system message that embeds an entire policy handbook. Users report that answers later in a session are short and are often cut off. Which statement describes the e
- A request to your Foundry model deployment is rejected because the prompt and the requested output exceed the model's context window. Azure Monitor shows the deployment far below its tokens-per-minute
- Your Python application calls a Foundry chat model deployment through the Chat Completions API to write product descriptions. Some descriptions end in the middle of a sentence. You must confirm in cod
- You are writing a Python helper that must decide, before each call to a Foundry chat model deployment, whether a conversation still fits inside the model's context budget. The transcript mixes English
- A Foundry extraction app sends each invoice to a chat model deployment together with a strict JSON schema in response_format so that replies match a fixed shape. The schema is large, and long invoices
- Your application sends very large prompts to a Foundry model deployment through the Responses API. Responses stop early, so you raise max_output_tokens to the model's documented maximum output value.
- Chat roles structure instructions, user input, and conversation history
Chat models accept an ordered transcript of messages rather than a single unstructured completion string. A system message supplies behavior and constraints, user messages supply requests, and assistant messages can preserve prior responses or provide examples.
Trap The assistant role is where application-wide rules must be placed before every system message.
13 questions test this
- Your Python app sends behavior rules to a Foundry reasoning model deployment in a system message. A teammate proposes moving those rules into a message with the developer role while keeping the system
- A Foundry chat app sends a customer question with one function tool attached to the request. The model replies with a tool call, and the app runs the function successfully. The app must now call the m
- You are building a Python application on a Microsoft Foundry chat model deployment that answers product questions. Every reply must follow the same two-line format, and the system message already stat
- A Foundry chat app builds a messages array in which several entries carry the assistant role. Some of those entries are replies the model produced earlier in the session. Others are sample answers tha
- A Foundry chat application shows a session's turns in a list ordered newest first, and it passes that same list as the messages array of every Chat Completions request. The system message stays in the
- You are porting a Python utility that built one long prompt string for an older text completion model. The utility must now call a Foundry chat model deployment through the Chat Completions API. Micro
- Your Python app calls a Foundry model deployment through the Responses API. A user now asks a follow-up question that depends on the answer the model returned a moment ago. The team does not want the
- A Foundry chat application stores the text of every turn in a database, but not which participant produced it. After a restart, it rebuilds the request as a system message followed by all stored turns
- You are moving a lightweight Foundry assistant from the Chat Completions API to the Responses API. Its behavior rules currently travel in a system message at the start of the messages array. The rules
- Your Foundry chat app passes two function definitions in the tools parameter of every Chat Completions request. The model often answers from its own knowledge instead of calling either function. A tea
- You are adding a helpdesk assistant to an internal portal by calling a Microsoft Foundry chat model deployment through the Chat Completions API. The assistant must decline questions outside the IT ser
- A developer builds a first Foundry chat sample in Python that sends only a user message to a model deployment through the Chat Completions API. A reviewer asks whether the messages array also has to c
- A Foundry chat app builds a messages array holding a system message, the earlier turns, and the assistant's most recent reply as the final entry. The app then calls the Chat Completions API and expect
- Embeddings represent semantic meaning as numerical vectors
An embedding is a numerical vector representation of semantic meaning. Semantically similar inputs should have vectors that are close to one another in the embedding space.
Trap An embedding is the natural-language completion returned to the user.
19 questions test this
- Your Python app calls a Microsoft Foundry embeddings deployment twice, once for each of two sentences that mean the same thing but share almost no words. A junior developer expects the two returned ar
- A colleague vectorized 40,000 documents into an Azure AI Search index six months ago. You now write the query code and vectorize each incoming user question with a different embedding model that you d
- A teammate loads embeddings into an Azure AI Search index by writing each vector into a searchable text field as one comma-separated string. Vector queries against that index fail. What does the index
- You must make a 400-page product manual searchable by meaning in an Azure AI Search index. Embedding models accept only a limited number of tokens per input, and each retrieved result must be small en
- You are building your first retrieval feature in a Microsoft Foundry project. The app must find stored FAQ entries whose meaning matches a user's typed question, even when the wording is completely di
- You add a new vector field to an Azure AI Search index and load vectors that your Microsoft Foundry embedding deployment generated. Some documents are rejected with a dimension error while others load
- You rank long knowledge-base articles against a short user question in an Azure AI Search index. A colleague proposes scoring each article by counting the words it shares with the question instead of
- Your Azure AI Search index holds vector fields that were populated during indexing. Your app sends the user's typed question to the index as plain text, but the app has not supplied a query vector, so
- Your Python app splits a document library into several thousand chunks and passes all of them in the input list of one request to a Microsoft Foundry embeddings deployment. The call fails with an HTTP
- Your team must make thousands of PDFs in Azure Blob Storage searchable by meaning from a Foundry app. Nobody on the team wants to write and operate code that splits each file and calls the embedding d
- A travel app stores its product descriptions in English in an Azure AI Search index and vectorizes them with a multilingual embedding model. Users type their queries in German, and the same model vect
- Your Python app sends 20 support articles to a Microsoft Foundry embeddings deployment in one request by passing the article texts as a list in the input parameter. You must store each article's vecto
- Your team stores support articles as vectors in an Azure AI Search index. A user searches for 'canine care tips', but every article uses the word 'dog' and none of them contains the word 'canine'. The
- A photo library app must let users find stored product photos by typing a description such as 'red running shoe'. The photos carry no captions, tags, or other metadata. The typed description must be m
- You build a retrieval-augmented generation chat app in a Microsoft Foundry project. A vector search over your index returns the three chunks closest to the user's question. A teammate asks what the ap
- An Azure AI Search index holds vectors for two knowledge-base articles that both use the word charge: one covers credit-card billing, the other covers charging a device battery. A customer asks why a
- You design an Azure AI Search index for a Foundry chat app. Each indexed chunk has a vector plus a region label. Users must be limited to chunks from their own region when the app runs a vector query.
- An image search index was built by vectorizing photos with the legacy English-only version of the Azure Vision multimodal embeddings model. You now vectorize new photos and every text query with the m
- You design an Azure AI Search index for a retrieval-augmented generation app. A teammate proposes storing only vector fields to save space, and reconstructing each article's text from its vector whene
- Embedding models fit semantic similarity and retrieval tasks
Choose an embedding model when text must be converted into vectors for semantic comparison, clustering, or similarity search. A chat model is the adjacent choice when the required output is newly generated natural language rather than a vector.
Trap Choose an image-generation model because it can create a visual representation of each text passage.
13 questions test this
- Your Microsoft Foundry project runs an embedding deployment that already vectorizes 500 product descriptions for a similarity feature. Marketing now asks the app to write a fresh two-sentence promotio
- A Microsoft Foundry project holds one chat deployment and one embedding deployment. The app first locates the contract clauses that relate to a user's question, then drafts an email that summarizes th
- A recruiting app must rank hundreds of stored resumes against a newly posted job description so recruiters see the closest matches first. Both the resumes and the description are free text, and shared
- A marketplace app receives new product listings from many sellers. Before publishing, it must flag a listing that describes the same product as one already in the catalog, even when the two descriptio
- You must score how closely each incoming support email matches a fixed set of known issue descriptions. A teammate proposes sending both texts to the chat deployment and asking it to answer with a sco
- A junior developer writes a Python app in a Microsoft Foundry project. The app calls the embeddings deployment with a user's typed question and expects the response to carry the matching FAQ entries t
- Your team's Foundry project already runs a chat deployment that answers customer questions. A junior developer asks why the new text-similarity feature needs an embedding deployment at all, since the
- A research team has a Microsoft Foundry project that contains a chat deployment, an embedding deployment, an image generation deployment, and a connection to Azure Speech in Foundry Tools. The team li
- Your team writes a Python app in a Microsoft Foundry project that pushes handbook sections straight into an Azure AI Search index containing a vector field. The team uses no indexer and no skillset, a
- You are writing your first Python script in a Microsoft Foundry project. The script sends forty stored meeting notes and one newly typed note to an embedding deployment, and the deployment returns one
- You are starting a lightweight Python app in a Microsoft Foundry project. The app must judge which stored customer feedback entries mean the same as a newly typed comment. The model catalog lists thou
- A news site wants an articles like this one panel on every story page. The panel must surface stories that cover related subject matter, and the editorial team adds no tags or categories to any story.
- A Microsoft Foundry project holds a library of free-text field reports and one deployed embedding model. The team plans three features: finding the reports that match a typed question, grouping the re
- Chat models fit conversational and instruction-following text tasks
Chat models accept role-labeled message transcripts and return generated assistant messages. This format fits natural-language instruction following, question answering, and multi-turn text interaction.
Trap Choose sentiment analysis when the application must compose a new natural-language answer to a user's question.
16 questions test this
- You are writing a lightweight Python application that calls a deployed chat completion model in Microsoft Foundry and prints the reply in a console window. The request completes successfully and you i
- A marketing assistant pastes a bulleted product specification into an internal Microsoft Foundry tool and asks for a single promotional paragraph. The tool sends the bullet list and that written instr
- You are developing a lightweight Microsoft Foundry application that calls a deployed chat completion model for an online shop. You build a request that carries the shop's standing rules and two sample
- A knowledge-base tool calls extractive summarization in Azure Language whenever an employee types a question about the staff handbook. Employees complain that the tool returns sentences copied out of
- You are building a lightweight Microsoft Foundry application for a marketing team. The application must take a plain product specification that a user pastes in and rewrite it as a short promotional p
- A support desk already runs Azure Language sentiment analysis over incoming customer emails so that angry messages are handled first. Management now wants the same tool to send every customer a writte
- You are exploring the Microsoft Foundry model catalog for a lightweight application that must hold written conversations with customers. The catalog lists thousands of models, and you want the browse
- Your company runs a support portal where customers type product questions in free text. You are building a lightweight Microsoft Foundry application that must reply to each question with a newly compo
- You built a lightweight Microsoft Foundry console app that sends one user question at a time to a deployed chat completion model. Testers report that the model cannot answer follow-up questions that r
- You are writing a lightweight Python application in Microsoft Foundry that maintains a multi-turn conversation with a deployed model named gpt-5-mini and prints each written reply. The project already
- You are choosing between three chat completion models in the Microsoft Foundry portal for a question-answering assistant. You want to see how the candidates rank on benchmarks that match that specific
- A colleague has already created a Microsoft Foundry project and its resource for you. You need to run a Python sample that calls the chat completions endpoint and passes a model name in every request.
- A logistics team pastes free-text delivery notes into an internal tool. You are building a lightweight Microsoft Foundry application that must return each note's customer name, address, and tracking n
- Your team is new to Microsoft Foundry and is comparing model capabilities before building a customer assistant. A developer asks how a chat completion model differs from the older text-in, text-out co
- A colleague's lightweight Microsoft Foundry application sends one long prompt string to a deployed chat completion model, in the style used with older completion models. The replies are verbose and fr
- You are developing a lightweight Microsoft Foundry application that lets employees ask follow-up questions about the company travel policy. Each reply must be written by the model, and the assistant m
- Multimodal models are required when prompts combine modalities
Choose a multimodal model whose model card lists every required input type when a solution must reason over combinations such as text and images. A text-only model is not an appropriate choice merely because the desired response is text.
Trap Choose any text-output model because output modality alone determines whether images can be supplied as input.
9 questions test this
- Two catalog models are on a team's shortlist in the Microsoft Foundry portal. Both return written text, and the team has opened the side-by-side comparison view to decide which candidate can answer qu
- A claims application sends the adjuster's typed note and a photograph of the damaged vehicle in the same request to a model deployment in Microsoft Foundry. Requests that carry only the typed note suc
- A call center quality team is building a lightweight Microsoft Foundry application. A supervisor types a question about a recorded call, and the application sends that typed question together with the
- A trainee reads the capabilities tables for Foundry Models sold by Azure and notices that several models are listed with text and image input but with text-only output. The trainee asks what that comb
- A new feature must answer customer questions about photographs that customers attach to their messages, and the answers appear as written text. A developer argues that the project's existing text-only
- A logistics team is building a tool in which a driver types a note about a delivery problem and attaches a photograph of the damaged pallet, and the tool must reply in writing. Four catalog models are
- A Microsoft Foundry project has one deployment: a chat model whose card lists text as its only accepted input type. The team reviews four requested features and needs to know which one that deployment
- An internal help desk has a Microsoft Foundry project with one model deployment: a vision-enabled chat model from the GPT-4o series. The product owner lists four requested features for the next releas
- A developer is shortlisting catalog models in the Microsoft Foundry portal for an assistant that must answer questions about photographs which users upload. Before deploying anything, the developer wa
- Image-generation models create original images from natural-language instructions
An image-generation model synthesizes new visual content from a text prompt or an image-editing instruction. Its result is newly created image content rather than labels or coordinates for supplied pixels.
7 questions test this
- An internal tool must do two things inside one Microsoft Foundry project: describe photographs that staff upload for an accessibility report, and create brand-new marketing pictures from written brief
- A trainee deploys an image generation model in a Microsoft Foundry project and sends one written prompt describing a red velvet armchair in a bright loft. No picture and no other content are included
- A publisher's Microsoft Foundry project has a vision-enabled chat model deployment that the editorial team already uses every day. The team now lists four new requests, and only one of them needs an i
- A magazine's Microsoft Foundry project must add alternative text for thousands of photographs that already sit in the archive, and it must also create brand-new illustrations from written article brie
- A legal reviewer asks how a new campaign tool obtains the pictures it publishes. The tool sends only a written brief to an image generation model deployment in Microsoft Foundry, and no company photog
- A trainee sends the written instruction to make a picture of a red sofa to the project's vision-enabled chat model deployment. The deployment returns a written description of a red sofa rather than a
- An e-learning team's Microsoft Foundry project has a chat model deployment and a newly added GPT-image model deployment. For each new slide, lesson authors fill in a short form naming the workplace, t
- The model leaderboard and model cards support evidence-based model comparison
Use the Model leaderboard and Compare models experience in the Foundry portal to compare supported benchmark and performance information for candidate models, including cost comparisons exposed by the experience. Use each model card to confirm supported data types, features, deployment options, benchmark details, and license information.
Trap Use the evaluator catalog, which lists evaluation methods rather than comparing candidate model costs and capabilities.
9 questions test this
- A bank compares two chat models for a customer-facing assistant on the safety leaderboard in the Microsoft Foundry portal. The leaderboard reports an attack success rate for prompts written to elicit
- Your team deploys the chat model that sits at the top of the quality leaderboard in the Microsoft Foundry portal. Tested on your own archive of support articles, its answers are weaker than those of a
- You are shortlisting models in the Microsoft Foundry model catalog for a lightweight application. The model card of one candidate shows a Quick facts section, a Details tab, a Deployments tab, and a L
- A call center quality team is building a lightweight Microsoft Foundry application. A supervisor types a question about a recorded call, and the application sends that typed question together with the
- A startup plans to ship a customer-facing product built on a Foundry model from the partners and community collection. Before anyone deploys the model, the legal team asks for the terms that govern th
- A team is about to ship a customer-facing assistant built on a Foundry model sold by Azure that ranks near the top of the safety leaderboard. A developer argues that the published benchmark scores rem
- A design team is choosing between three image generation models listed in the Microsoft Foundry model catalog. A developer opens the model leaderboard to rank the three candidates. None of the three c
- Two chat models on your shortlist score almost the same on the quality leaderboard in the Microsoft Foundry portal. Your assistant runs in a live chat window, and the reply text must start appearing w
- A developer must choose a model for an assistant that writes Python code snippets. The developer sorts the model leaderboard in the Microsoft Foundry portal on the overall quality index and prepares t
- A model deployment is required before the model can receive inference requests
Selecting a model in the Foundry portal model catalog does not by itself make the model callable. Unless the model supports instant access (preview), deploy the model to create an inference target, then use the deployment name when sending requests. With instant access, supported models can instead be called by model name without creating a deployment.
Trap Adding the model to a project collection automatically creates a callable inference endpoint.
31 questions test this
- Your Python prototype calls a chat model in a Microsoft Foundry project by passing the model name, and nothing is deployed in the project. Governance now requires a content filtering policy for that m
- Your Microsoft Foundry project contains one chat model deployment. Before writing any code, you want to compare that deployment's answers with the answers of a model that supports instant access, usin
- Your Microsoft Foundry resource contains one deployment of a chat model that a production application calls. An internal experiment must run the same model with a different content filtering configura
- A developer calls a supported model by name through instant access in a Microsoft Foundry project, and the project contains no deployments. After Microsoft releases a newer version of that model, the
- You deploy a chat model in a Microsoft Foundry resource and test it successfully in the playground. A teammate now needs the connection information so that a Python application can send requests to th
- You are helping a developer who wants to prototype in a Microsoft Foundry project without creating any deployments. The developer needs to know which of the catalog's models can be called by name from
- Developers across your Foundry account prototype with several instant access models. Your compliance team wants one baseline responsible AI policy in force for every model those developers call by nam
- You deploy a chat model in a Microsoft Foundry resource. During deployment you accept the default settings but change the deployment name from the model name to prod-chat. A colleague's Python applica
- Developers in your Microsoft Foundry project call base chat models by passing the model name in code, without creating anything first. You fine-tune one of those chat models so that it specializes in
- A developer opens the model catalog from a Microsoft Foundry project that is backed by an Azure OpenAI resource. A Meta Llama model that a colleague uses elsewhere is missing, and only Azure OpenAI mo
- A Microsoft Foundry project in the preview region for instant access contains no deployments. A developer wants to send test prompts to a supported instant access model from inside the Foundry portal
- An application in a Microsoft Foundry project calls a supported model through instant access by passing only the model name. After the provider ships a newer version, the model's answers change wordin
- A Microsoft Foundry project in the preview region for instant access already runs two production deployments. A developer wants to see how three other supported chat models answer the team's own promp
- A Microsoft Foundry project must run a chat model for a customer whose contract states that inference data may be processed only in the single Azure region where the resource is deployed. The team cur
- You are explaining Microsoft Foundry to a developer who has just joined your team. The developer has browsed the model catalog in the Foundry portal and opened several model cards, but has not yet sen
- Three teams share one Microsoft Foundry project and all call the same chat model by name through instant access. Management now requires each team to have its own TPM quota allocation and rate limit,
- You are guiding a team that will run a flagship Azure OpenAI chat model in Microsoft Foundry. The team needs the widest range of capabilities, including customizable content filtering, keyless authent
- A Microsoft Foundry project needs a Meta Llama model that the catalog lists under Models from partners and community. You open the model card, accept the terms of use, and complete the Azure Marketpla
- A Microsoft Foundry project already serves a chat model through a standard deployment, and your Python application calls it with the OpenAI SDK. The team deploys an open-source model from the catalog
- You deploy a chat model in a Microsoft Foundry resource by using custom settings. The dialog asks you to select a deployment type, such as Global Standard or Data Zone Standard, and a colleague asks w
- In a Microsoft Foundry project your colleagues call gpt-5-mini by name through instant access. One application now needs its own reserved capacity for that model, so you start creating a deployment. T
- A Microsoft Foundry project calls a supported chat model by passing the model name, and no deployment exists in the project. A compliance review requires a content filtering policy for that one model
- A Microsoft Foundry project must serve an open-weight model that appears in the model catalog under the Hugging Face collection. The model is not one of the Foundry Models sold by Azure. The team want
- A developer new to Microsoft Foundry is about to deploy a chat model from the catalog for a first application. The developer expects to choose between standard deployment in a Foundry resource and man
- You are onboarding a developer to a Microsoft Foundry project that has no deployments. The developer needs to know which catalog models can be called immediately by name, and which ones the team must
- A production Python application calls a chat model in a Microsoft Foundry resource by passing the deployment name svc-chat. During a cleanup, a colleague deletes the svc-chat deployment, and the model
- A developer new to Microsoft Foundry has read that a catalog model must be deployed before an application can send it inference requests. The developer asks what the platform actually creates when you
- Your organization uses Azure Policy to block one model provider across its Foundry accounts. Developers in a project now call models by name through instant access instead of creating deployments. Gov
- Azure Policy disables instant access for a subscription, so an application can no longer call a chat model by passing its name without a deployment. The model is then deployed as team-chat in the same
- A team works in a Microsoft Foundry project that sits in a region where instant access is not offered during the preview. A developer's application passes a supported model's name in the model paramet
- Your team is prototyping in a Microsoft Foundry project. The team wants to call several newly released chat models on the day each one ships, and to switch between them by changing a single string in
- Standard deployment in a Foundry resource is the preferred general deployment option
Use standard deployment in a Foundry resource whenever the model supports it; Microsoft documents it as the preferred option with the broadest capabilities. It can support regional, data-zone, or global processing and standard or provisioned throughput choices, depending on the model.
Trap Use managed compute for every catalog model because dedicated virtual machines always provide more Foundry features.
6 questions test this
- Your architect asks what the Foundry Models sold by Azure category in the model catalog means for a model your team plans to deploy with standard deployment in a Foundry resource. The team's contract
- While creating a deployment of a chat model in a Foundry resource, you must pick a deployment type before the deployment is created. A teammate assumes the choice only changes the label shown in the d
- Your team wants to use an Anthropic chat model that appears in the Microsoft Foundry model catalog. A colleague claims that only Azure OpenAI models can use standard deployment in a Foundry resource,
- A developer new to Microsoft Foundry has seen managed compute offered for some catalog models. The developer asks why Microsoft's guidance is to use standard deployment in a Foundry resource whenever
- A colleague proposes deploying a flagship Azure OpenAI chat model to managed compute in Microsoft Foundry, arguing that dedicated GPU capacity always unlocks more Foundry features. You review the depl
- You created a deployment of a chat model in a Foundry resource by using the Global Standard deployment type. Your finance team asks what the deployment costs overnight, when the application is idle an
- Serverless and managed-compute deployments trade hosting responsibility and billing basis
A serverless deployment exposes a Microsoft-hosted model through an API and is generally billed for API input and output usage. Managed compute deploys model weights to dedicated managed virtual machines, requires compute quota, and is billed for compute uptime.
Trap Serverless deployment installs model weights on dedicated virtual machines in your subscription and bills by core-hour.
7 questions test this
- An internal demo runs on a managed compute deployment in Microsoft Foundry and receives traffic for only a few hours each week. Finance asks you to cut the cost the deployment accrues while no demo is
- Your team plans to move a customer-facing workload onto an open-source model served by managed compute in Microsoft Foundry. The workload carries a contractual availability commitment to the customer.
- Your project serves an open-source chat model on managed compute in Microsoft Foundry, which is in public preview. A review requires that user prompts and model responses be screened for harmful conte
- Your team deploys an open-source model to managed compute in a Microsoft Foundry project for an internal pilot. Requests arrive only during office hours, but the cost report shows the deployment accru
- You plan a managed compute deployment for a Hugging Face model in Microsoft Foundry. Your subscription already holds a large unused Azure virtual machine core quota in the target region, and a colleag
- Your team must serve a chat model in Microsoft Foundry with no capacity planning, and wants a bill that tracks request volume. A colleague warns that any Foundry deployment means renting GPU capacity
- You are creating a managed compute deployment in Microsoft Foundry for an open-source language model. A colleague asks which virtual machine size to select, and how many nodes the deployment needs for
- Max Completion Tokens caps the generated token budget
Configure Max Completion Tokens when a response must remain within a defined generated-token length or when generated-token cost must be bounded. The value is an upper bound that includes visible output and, for applicable models, reasoning tokens; it does not guarantee that the model will use the full amount.
Trap Configure Temperature, which changes sampling randomness rather than setting a response-length ceiling.
25 questions test this
- Your Microsoft Foundry chat app summarizes support tickets. Testers report that long tickets produce summaries that break off halfway through the final bullet point, while short tickets are summarized
- A Microsoft Foundry chat app enables streaming so that users see text appear while the model is still working. The team expected the change to lower the generated-token bill as well, but the monthly c
- A Microsoft Foundry chat app appends every turn to the messages list and sends the full transcript with each request to a deployed chat model. After a long session the calls begin to fail. The app alw
- A Microsoft Foundry model deployment writes weekly newsletter drafts. Editors report that a single response repeats the same sentence and the same stock phrase several times. You must reduce how often
- A Microsoft Foundry chat app must log how much of each request's generated-token budget was actually used, so that the team can right-size the Max Completion Tokens value it sends. The response object
- A developer wants a Microsoft Foundry chat deployment to word its replies differently each time it answers the same question. They raise the Max Completion Tokens value on every request. The replies r
- A team is about to write the production code for a Microsoft Foundry chat feature and must pick a Max Completion Tokens value that keeps answers complete without paying for generation the feature neve
- A Microsoft Foundry chat app shows a blank panel for several seconds and then displays the entire answer at once. Product owners want users to see text appearing while the model is still working on th
- You deploy a model in a Microsoft Foundry project to classify support emails into five fixed categories. The app must return the same category for a given email on every run, so the model has to pick
- A Microsoft Foundry project hosts a chat model deployment that answers policy questions. A reviewer says the answers are accurate but shallow, so a developer doubles the Max Completion Tokens value on
- An app on a Microsoft Foundry deployment must return longer answers to a research question. The team raises the deployment's tokens-per-minute allocation in the Foundry portal quota pane, waits for th
- A developer sets Temperature to zero on a Microsoft Foundry model deployment because the answers are too long for a small mobile panel. After the change the answers are far more consistent between run
- A developer times the same prompt twice against one Microsoft Foundry model deployment. The first call asks for a very large generated-token allowance. The second asks for an allowance close to the ex
- A Microsoft Foundry deployment backs an internal chat assistant, and users complain about slow replies. Tracing shows that every request asks the deployment for a very large generated-token allowance,
- A Python app calls a Microsoft Foundry chat deployment to draft marketing taglines. To offer choice, it sets the n parameter to 3 so that each request returns three completions. Generated-token usage
- A developer configures a large Max Completion Tokens value on a Microsoft Foundry chat deployment because product management asked for longer, more complete answers. Most replies stay short, and usage
- A product owner asks that every answer from a Microsoft Foundry chat deployment be limited to about 100 words so that the text fits a fixed panel. A developer converts that request into a Max Completi
- A Microsoft Foundry deployment returns frequent 429 responses during a busy hour. A developer suggests lowering Temperature and Top P on every request so that each call asks the model to do less work
- Your Microsoft Foundry app calls a GPT-5 reasoning model deployment with a small generated-token allowance. The visible answers come back truncated even though the text that does appear is very short.
- A new developer is working in the Microsoft Foundry model playground and experimenting with the generation settings on a deployed chat model. They ask you what the Top P setting actually changes when
- You migrate a Python app from the Chat Completions API to the Azure OpenAI Responses API. The app calls a GPT-5 reasoning model deployment in a Microsoft Foundry project and must keep an upper bound o
- Users report that a Microsoft Foundry chat feature has become slower since a prompt change last week. In Azure Monitor, the deployment's time-to-last-byte metric has risen, and its generated completio
- A Python app on a Microsoft Foundry deployment sends short prompts and receives short answers, yet many calls return HTTP 429. Azure Monitor shows token usage well below the deployment's tokens-per-mi
- A Microsoft Foundry model deployment drafts standard contract clauses. Reviewers report that the wording drifts between runs and sometimes includes unusual phrasing. You must restrict the model so tha
- A Microsoft Foundry chat deployment answers billing questions inside a small support console. The answers must be brief, and testers complain that replies now stop in the middle of a sentence because
- Temperature and Top P control token sampling rather than response length
Lower temperature produces more focused and consistent output, while higher temperature increases randomness. Top P is an alternative nucleus-sampling control that limits consideration to tokens within a chosen probability mass; normally adjust Temperature or Top P, not both in the same request.
Trap Increase Max Completion Tokens to make token selection more random without allowing a longer answer.
11 questions test this
- Replies from a Microsoft Foundry chat deployment open in the expected house style, then drift into unusual wording as they run on. A developer concludes that the Top P value on the request stops apply
- A developer wants a Microsoft Foundry chat deployment to word its replies differently each time it answers the same question. They raise the Max Completion Tokens value on every request. The replies r
- You are walking a developer through the generation settings on a Microsoft Foundry chat model deployment. The developer notes that the documentation describes Temperature and Top P as two ways to cont
- Two customers put the same product question to a Microsoft Foundry chat deployment a minute apart. Both receive an accurate answer, but the two replies are worded differently. Support asks whether the
- A Microsoft Foundry project contains one chat model deployment that two application features call. A compliance-answer feature must word its replies consistently. A workshop-title panel should suggest
- A Microsoft Foundry deployment returns frequent 429 responses during a busy hour. A developer suggests lowering Temperature and Top P on every request so that each call asks the model to do less work
- A Microsoft Foundry chat deployment writes short product blurbs for a catalogue page. To hold the wording close to the brand voice, a developer set Top P to a very low value on every request. The blur
- A developer tunes the Temperature value in the Microsoft Foundry model playground until the assistant's wording is right, then writes a Python app that calls the same deployment with the same prompt.
- A product manager plans to run a Microsoft Foundry chat deployment at a higher Temperature for a month. The manager expects the deployed model itself to become more creative for every team that calls
- A Microsoft Foundry project holds a chat model deployment that answers questions and a text embedding model deployment that indexes your documentation. A developer sends Temperature and Top P on the c
- A Python app calls a Microsoft Foundry deployment of a GPT-5 reasoning model through the Chat Completions API. The request still carries the temperature and top_p values that the team used with their
Also tested in
References
- Large language models (LLMs)
- Work with chat completion models - Microsoft Foundry
- Azure OpenAI reasoning models - Microsoft Foundry
- Explore the model catalog
- Microsoft Foundry Models overview
- Compare models using the model leaderboard - Microsoft Foundry
- Instant access to models in Microsoft Foundry (preview)
- Understanding deployment types in Microsoft Foundry Models
- Deployment overview for Microsoft Foundry Models
- Microsoft Foundry Playgrounds
- Study guide for Exam AI-901: Microsoft Azure AI Fundamentals