1. An Azure AI Foundry agent is used by a financial firm to generate trade summaries. A compliance requirement states that every agent response visible to end users must first be reviewed and approved by a compliance officer. Which mechanism in Azure AI Foundry Agent Service should you use to implement this requirement?
- A. Set the Run's `max_completion_tokens` to zero until approval is received, then reset it
- B. Configure a required_action of type `submit_tool_outputs` and treat compliance review as a manual tool output submission step
- C. Poll the Run status for `requires_action`, surface the pending output to the compliance officer, and only continue the Run after the officer submits approval via the submit tool outputs endpoint✓ Correct
- D. Deploy a second agent whose sole role is to intercept and hold all messages on the Thread until approved
Explanation
When an agent Run reaches `requires_action` status (typically due to a tool call that needs external input), execution is paused and the caller must submit tool outputs to resume. By modeling the compliance approval as a tool call whose output requires human review, you can pause the Run at that point, surface the pending action to the compliance officer, and only resume by calling the submit tool outputs API after approval — implementing a true human-in-the-loop gate. Setting `max_completion_tokens` to zero does not pause the Run in a reviewable state; it would cause the Run to fail or produce empty output. Treating a submit_tool_outputs action as a manual step is close but option C specifically describes the correct full flow: polling for `requires_action` then submitting approval — option B is incomplete because it omits polling and the approval gate logic. A second interceptor agent adds complexity, has no native pause mechanism, and does not guarantee the primary Run is actually paused.