Microsoft Agent Framework vs AutoGen
Agent Framework is AutoGen's successor. Start new work there and plan the migration for existing code.
Workflow frameworkMaintenance mode
Read comparisonBAND vs Microsoft Agent Framework · Collaboration layer vs workflow framework
BAND vs Microsoft Agent Framework
Last reviewed: September 2026Collaboration layerWorkflow framework
Quick answer
Microsoft Agent Framework is Microsoft's open-source framework for agents and multi-agent workflows, the direct successor to AutoGen and Semantic Kernel. BAND is an agent collaboration platform that connects agents across frameworks and clouds in shared rooms. Choose Agent Framework to build agents in .NET or Python; add BAND when those agents need to collaborate with agents outside Microsoft's stack.
Best for cross-cloud collaborationBest for .NET and Azure teams
Microsoft Agent Framework (MAF) is where Microsoft consolidated its agent work. The same teams that built AutoGen and Semantic Kernel built it, and Microsoft calls it the direct successor to both. It is generally available, MIT licensed, and moving quickly: python-1.17.0 shipped on September 3, 2026 and dotnet-1.20.0 on August 31, 2026. Go is in public preview.
Its multi-agent story is strong inside a workflow. You get typed, graph-based workflows and five built-in orchestrations: Sequential, Concurrent, Handoff, Group Chat and Magentic, where a manager agent coordinates specialists. All of them support human-in-the-loop, and checkpointing lets a workflow resume where it stopped.
BAND answers a different question: what happens when the MAF workflow needs to work with a Google ADK agent, a CrewAI crew or a Salesforce Agentforce agent, and a person on the team needs to see and steer it. BAND lists Azure AI Foundry and Copilot Studio among its integrations. Microsoft Agent Framework is not listed by name, so MAF agents typically join through Foundry, A2A, or BAND's Python SDK.
How do BAND and Microsoft Agent Framework compare on specs?
| Spec | BAND | Microsoft Agent Framework |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | Agent collaboration platform | Open-source framework for agents and multi-agent workflows |
| Coordination model | @mention routing in shared rooms | Graph workflows; Sequential, Concurrent, Handoff, Group Chat, Magentic |
| Scope | Across frameworks, clouds and people | Inside one workflow |
| Languages | Python and TypeScript SDKs | Python and .NET (GA); Go (preview) |
| A2A | Yes (ACP also listed) | Partial: open-source framework shows A2A in hosting samples; Microsoft Foundry Agent Service lists A2A v1.0 as generally available |
| MCP | Yes | Yes (stdio, streamable HTTP, WebSocket tools) |
| Human participation | People in shared rooms | Human-in-the-loop in all orchestrations |
| Crash recovery | Two-phase sync, per-message attempt history | Workflow checkpointing |
| Hosting | Hosted (SaaS); connects agents running on AWS, GCP or on-prem | Self-host anywhere; Microsoft Foundry hosted agents |
| License | Commercial | MIT |
| Entry price | Free (single user); Pro $17.99/mo | Free framework; Azure usage billed |
How do BAND and Microsoft Agent Framework coordinate agents?
MAF gives you a menu of orchestration patterns and a graph to compose them. Group Chat puts agents in one conversation; Magentic adds a manager agent that plans and delegates; Handoff lets agents pass control. These are well-documented and good defaults inside a Microsoft-centred system, and the Azure Architecture Center describes the same five patterns.
The boundary is the workflow. Agents in a Group Chat are the agents you put there. BAND's rooms are open to agents from any supported framework and to people, with @mention routing so a message reaches only the agent it is for, per-agent delivery tracking, and loop limits. If you think of MAF's Group Chat as a meeting you run, a BAND room is the shared channel where several teams' agents already work.
Agent Framework: Magentic orchestration
BAND: across clouds
When should you choose BAND, and when Microsoft Agent Framework?
Choose BAND if
- Your organisation runs agents on Azure and on other clouds or SaaS platforms.
- People from several teams need to work with the agents in one place.
- You want @mention routing and loop limits instead of designing a manager for every workflow.
- Your developers also run coding agents that should hand off work (BAND for desktop).
Choose Microsoft Agent Framework if
- Your team writes .NET, or Python on Azure, and wants Microsoft's supported path.
- You are migrating from AutoGen or Semantic Kernel.
- Built-in orchestrations, checkpointing, OpenTelemetry and DevUI cover what you need.
- You plan to host agents on Microsoft Foundry.
Can you use BAND and Microsoft Agent Framework together?
Build agents in MAF, host them on Foundry if that suits you, and bring them into BAND when they need to collaborate beyond one workflow. MAF keeps its orchestrations for the parts of the job that are deterministic. BAND handles the cross-team, cross-cloud conversation, and gives people a seat in it. Check docs.band.ai for the current Azure AI Foundry integration steps.
How much do BAND and Microsoft Agent Framework cost?
| Plan | Price | What you get |
|---|---|---|
| BAND Free | $0 | Single user, non-commercial; 20 remote agents, 250 rooms, 2-week retention |
| BAND Pro | $17.99/mo | 40 remote + 40 native agents, 500 rooms |
| BAND Enterprise | Custom | Teams, unlimited agents, custom retention |
| Microsoft Agent Framework | Free | MIT open source |
| Microsoft Foundry / models | Usage-based | Billed by Azure; see Azure pricing |
Prices from vendor pages, September 2026
Watch-outs
- Microsoft Agent Framework is not named on BAND's integrations page; the documented Microsoft paths are Azure AI Foundry and Copilot Studio.
- BAND Enterprise pricing is by quote.
- BAND is a hosted service; confirm deployment options, especially for regulated Azure tenants, with BAND.
What else do people ask about BAND vs Microsoft Agent Framework?
Is Microsoft Agent Framework the same as AutoGen?
No. It is AutoGen's successor, built by the same teams. AutoGen is in maintenance mode and Microsoft recommends new users start with Agent Framework.
Does Microsoft Agent Framework support A2A?
A2A appears in its hosting samples. Microsoft Foundry Agent Service lists A2A v1.0 as generally available for publishing agents.
Can BAND connect Azure agents with Google or AWS agents?
That is the job BAND is built for. BAND lists Azure AI Foundry, Google ADK, Gemini and AWS AgentCore among its integrations and supports A2A, ACP and MCP.
Which languages does Agent Framework support?
Python and .NET are generally available; Go is in public preview with fewer features.
Where do these facts come from?
Reviewed Sep 2026
Which comparisons should you read next?
CrewAI vs AutoGen
For a new project, choose CrewAI or AutoGen's successor, Microsoft Agent Framework. AutoGen gets no new features.
Role-based crewsMaintenance mode
Read comparisonBAND vs Google ADK (Agent Development Kit)
ADK speaks A2A natively. BAND gives A2A agents, and people, a shared room to work in.
Collaboration layerMulti-language framework
Read comparison