Prostir vs Microsoft Foundry: what is actually different?

Officially, Microsoft Foundry is positioned around Microsoft's current AI platform, formerly Azure AI Foundry, which unifies agents, models, and tools with projects, RBAC, networking, policies, tracing, monitoring, and evaluations. That makes it a good fit when an Azure engineering organization needs managed agent and model infrastructure, Entra identity, network isolation, evaluations, observability, and one cloud control plane. If that starting point already matches your job, it can be the shorter route.

• Azure governance, model choice, prompt or hosted agents, enterprise networking, observability, and cloud operations are central

Microsoft Foundry begins with an Azure subscription, Foundry resource and project, model deployment, identities, tools, knowledge, and prompt-agent or hosted-agent configuration. That is useful evidence, not a small implementation detail: the shorter setup is usually the one that matches the material, people, and systems already in place.

Ask who will open the product, what they need to finish, and where the result must live. If the recurring job is an enterprise Azure platform for building, deploying, governing, and observing agents, models, tools, and knowledge, Microsoft Foundry keeps that work close to its natural home. If the result must become an owned Prostir product, include publication and customer access in the decision rather than comparing editor screenshots.

Prostir is not a low-level agent framework. Its available Agent and Skill paths combine hosted knowledge, tools, auth, users, eligible payment paths, quotas, and private-by-default hosted routes or MCP endpoints that the owner can deliberately publish. Prostir also has a separate first-class Flow product for general automation, but Flow is currently a Preview and its production runtime guarantees remain gated.

• you want a higher-level creator product where a hosted Agent or Skill already owns its typed route, private-by-default MCP access, customer grants, quotas, and eligible sales

List who hosts the result, grants access, rotates credentials, reviews logs, updates knowledge, and handles payment or usage limits. Prostir brings those duties around an Agent or Skill into one owner-controlled boundary; Microsoft Foundry may still be the better place to build or run the underlying work.

The practical setup can be both products: Microsoft Foundry handles the job it is designed for, while Prostir publishes the Agent or Skill that customers and compatible AI clients reach. Keep one owner for each piece so credentials, data, and failures do not fall between platforms.

This is not a universal internal-versus-customer split: several alternatives publish web apps, APIs, widgets, or MCP surfaces too. Compare the exact final artifact, channels, access model, payment path, and operating responsibility. Choose Prostir when its available Agent or Skill path and hosted MCP/access boundary match that job; choose the Flow path only when evaluating a Preview rather than relying on production automation.

• They can sometimes sit together: Microsoft Foundry handles the job it is built for, while Prostir hosts the Agent or Skill that customers and AI clients reach.