Generated banner for Finetuning
Generated logo for Finetuning

Finetuning

MicrosoftOfficialCreated by Microsoft

  • Skill
  • Tool integration
  • Data and AI
  • MIT
  • Low risk
  • Has scripts

From the author

Fine-tune models on Microsoft Foundry using SFT (supervised), DPO (preference), or RFT (reinforcement with graders). Covers dataset preparation, training job submission, deployment, and evaluation. USE FOR: fine-tune, SFT, DPO, RFT, training data, grader, distillation, fine-tuned model, training job, large file upload, calibrate grader, deploy fine-tuned model, evaluate fine-tuned model. DO NOT USE FOR: general model deployment without fine-tuning (use deploy-model), agent creation (use agents), prompt optimization without training (use prompt-optimizer).
— the description by Microsoft

AutoGineer summary

Written by AutoGineer from the skill’s own files, not by the author

This skill provides the necessary procedures and tools for fine-tuning AI models on Microsoft Foundry. It supports three primary training methodologies: Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT), Direct Preference Optimization (DPO), and Reinforcement Fine-Tuning (RFT). The skill encompasses the entire lifecycle, including dataset preparation, training job submission, monitoring, model evaluation, and deployment. It also includes specific guidance for agentic RFT, where models are trained to utilize external tools, and provides scripts for data validation, grader calibration, and resource management.

What it does

  • Supports SFT, DPO, and RFT training methodologies.
  • Provides data validation scripts for SFT, DPO, and RFT formats.
  • Facilitates training job submission and monitoring on Microsoft Foundry.
  • Enables calibration of RFT graders and pass thresholds.
  • Offers tools for model evaluation and deployment via ARM REST API.
  • Includes utilities for synthetic data generation and dataset quality scoring.

When to use it

  • When you need to adapt a base model to specific tasks or domains.
  • When preparing or validating training datasets for SFT, DPO, or RFT.
  • When training models for agentic scenarios involving tool calling.
  • When you need to evaluate and deploy a fine-tuned model.
  • When troubleshooting training jobs or diagnosing poor model performance.

Advantages

  • Standardized workflows for different training types.
  • Includes built-in validation to prevent common data formatting errors.
  • Supports complex agentic RFT training with tool integration.
  • Provides robust scripts for monitoring and evaluating training progress.
  • Offers clear guidance on grader design and hyperparameter tuning.

Usage examples

“How do I validate my SFT dataset before training?”
The agent will instruct you to use the python scripts/validate/validate_sft.py script on your data.jsonl file to ensure it meets the required format.
“Submit an SFT training job using gpt-4.1-mini.”
The agent will provide the command using scripts/submit_training.py with the appropriate flags for model, training file, validation file, and type.
“How can I calibrate my RFT grader?”
The agent will guide you to use scripts/calibrate_grader.py to find the optimal pass_threshold, aiming for a 25-50% failure rate on the base model.
“Deploy my fine-tuned model after training.”
The agent will provide the command to use scripts/deploy_model.py, specifying the model-id and a deployment name.

Install

  1. Download the skill as a ZIP:

    https://autogineer.com/agent-skills/microsoft/finetuning/download
  2. Unzip it into the cross-client skills folder of your project:

    mkdir -p .agents/skills && unzip finetuning.zip -d .agents/skills

Documentation by Microsoft

Fine-Tuning on Microsoft Foundry

Fine-tune models using SFT (supervised), DPO (preference), or RFT (reinforcement with graders). Covers dataset prep, training, deployment, and evaluation.

When to Use

Use this sub-skill when the user asks about:

  • Fine-tuning a model (SFT, DPO, or RFT)

  • Preparing, validating, or formatting training data

  • Submitting, monitoring, or diagnosing training jobs

  • Calibrating graders or pass thresholds for RFT

  • Deploying or evaluating a fine-tuned model

  • Choosing between training types (SFT vs DPO vs RFT)

  • Distillation, synthetic data generation, or dataset quality scoring

  • Large file uploads for training data

  • Cleaning up fine-tuning resources (files, deployments)

Do NOT use for: General model deployment without fine-tuning (use deploy-model), agent creation (use agents), prompt optimization without training (use prompt-optimizer).

Workflows

References

Scripts

ScriptPurpose
scripts/submit_training.pySubmit SFT/DPO/RFT jobs
scripts/monitor_training.pyPoll job until completion
scripts/calibrate_grader.pyFind optimal RFT pass_threshold
scripts/check_training.pyAnalyze curves, list checkpoints
scripts/deploy_model.pyDeploy via ARM REST API
scripts/evaluate_model.pyLLM judge evaluation
scripts/convert_dataset.pyConvert between SFT/DPO/RFT formats
scripts/generate_distillation_data.pyGenerate synthetic training data
scripts/score_dataset.pyQuality scoring on training data
scripts/cleanup.pyDelete old files and deployments
scripts/validate/Data validators (SFT, DPO, RFT) + stats

Rules

  1. Always baseline first — evaluate the base model before fine-tuning

  2. Validate data before submitting — run scripts/validate/validate_sft.py

  3. Calibrate RFT graders — target 25-50% failure rate on the base model

  4. Evaluate checkpoints — don't blindly deploy the final one

  5. Measure token cost alongside accuracy when comparing models

Quick Reference

TaskCommand
Validate SFT datapython scripts/validate/validate_sft.py data.jsonl
Submit SFT jobpython scripts/submit_training.py --model gpt-4.1-mini --training-file train.jsonl --validation-file val.jsonl --type sft
Monitor jobpython scripts/monitor_training.py --job-id ftjob-xxx
Analyze curvespython scripts/check_training.py --job-id ftjob-xxx
Deploy modelpython scripts/deploy_model.py --model-id ft:gpt-4.1-mini:... --name my-eval
Evaluate modelpython scripts/evaluate_model.py --deployment-name my-eval --test-file test.jsonl

Error Handling

ErrorCauseFix
"API version not supported"Older openai SDK on /v1/ endpointUpgrade to openai>=1.0
"does not support fine-tuning with Standard TrainingType"OSS model needs globalStandardUse --use-rest flag or script auto-falls back
Job stuck in post-training evalUnder-provisioned tool endpoint (RFT)Scale to S2+, enable Always On
"DeploymentNotReady" after ARM succeedsARM/data-plane race conditionDelete and recreate deployment, wait 5 min
Content safety block at deploymentPII-dense training dataRemove problematic document types

Files

references/evaluation.md

Evaluation Methodology

Principles

  1. Always establish a baseline: Evaluate the base (un-tuned) model first. Without a baseline, you can't measure improvement.

  2. Use a held-out test set: Never evaluate on training or validation data. The model has seen those.

  3. Use the same test set for every model: This is the only way to compare results fairly.

  4. Use task-specific graders: Built-in generic evaluators (Coherence, Fluency) measure general quality and won't detect fine-tuning improvements. Use custom graders (Python, score model, string check) for task-specific evaluation.

  5. Measure cost alongside accuracy: Report completion tokens per response when comparing models or checkpoints. A model that achieves the same accuracy with fewer tokens is strictly better — cheaper inference and lower latency.

Two-Layer Evaluation Strategy

Use the Azure AI Evaluation SDK (azure-ai-evaluation) for all evaluation.

LayerPurposeGrader TypeWhen
Task-specific (primary)Measure FT improvementAzureOpenAIScoreModelGrader, AzureOpenAIPythonGrader, AzureOpenAIStringCheckGraderEvery eval
General quality (guardrail)Verify model didn't degradeCoherenceEvaluator, FluencyEvaluatorSpot-check only

Generic built-in evaluators (Coherence, Fluency, TaskAdherence) are guardrails, not metrics — they often show no difference between base and fine-tuned models even when domain-specific evaluation reveals clear improvement.

Custom Graders (Primary FT Evaluation)

1. Score Model Grader (LLM judge with task-specific rubric)

Best for: subjective tasks (summarization, alignment, style).

from azure.ai.evaluation import AzureOpenAIScoreModelGrader

summarization_grader = AzureOpenAIScoreModelGrader(
    model_config=model_config,
    name="summarization_quality",
    prompt="""Rate this news summary on a scale of 1-5.

Article: {{item.article}}
Summary: {{sample.output_text}}

Criteria:
- Captures ALL key facts (who, what, when, where)
- No hallucinated information not in the article
- Concise (under 3 sentences)

Score 1: Missing key facts or hallucinations
Score 3: Captures main point but misses details
Score 5: Perfect summary — all facts, no extras, concise

Return ONLY a number 1-5.""",
    output_type="numeric",
    pass_threshold=3,
)
2. Python Grader (programmatic/exact-match evaluation)

Best for: code generation, math, entity extraction, structured output.

from azure.ai.evaluation import AzureOpenAIPythonGrader

entity_grader = AzureOpenAIPythonGrader(
    name="entity_extraction_accuracy",
    source="""
import json

def grade(item, sample):
    try:
        extracted = json.loads(sample["output_text"])
        reference = json.loads(item["ground_truth"])
    except (json.JSONDecodeError, KeyError):
        return {"score": 0, "reason": "Invalid JSON output"}

    required_keys = ["people", "organizations", "locations", "dates"]
    missing = [k for k in required_keys if k not in extracted]
    if missing:
        return {"score": 0.5, "reason": f"Missing keys: {missing}"}

    total, matched = 0, 0
    for key in required_keys:
        ref_set = set(str(v).lower() for v in reference.get(key, []))
        ext_set = set(str(v).lower() for v in extracted.get(key, []))
        total += len(ref_set)
        matched += len(ref_set & ext_set)

    score = matched / total if total > 0 else 1.0
    return {"score": score, "reason": f"{matched}/{total} entities matched"}
""",
    pass_threshold=0.7,
)
3. String Check Grader (pattern matching)

Best for: classification, format compliance, tool calling format.

from azure.ai.evaluation import AzureOpenAIStringCheckGrader

tool_format_grader = AzureOpenAIStringCheckGrader(
    name="tool_call_format",
    input="{{sample.output_text}}",
    operation="like",          # or "eq", "starts_with", "contains"
    reference="function_call",
    pass_threshold=1,
)

classification_grader = AzureOpenAIStringCheckGrader(
    name="classification_accuracy",
    input="{{sample.output_text}}",
    operation="eq",
    reference="{{item.expected_label}}",
    pass_threshold=1,
)

Running an Evaluation

The evaluate() function runs multiple graders over an entire dataset:

from azure.ai.evaluation import evaluate, F1ScoreEvaluator

result = evaluate(
    data="eval_data.jsonl",
    evaluators={
        "task_grader": my_custom_score_grader,   # primary
        "f1": F1ScoreEvaluator(),                 # token overlap
    },
    output_path="./eval_results.json",
)

for metric, value in result["metrics"].items():
    print(f"{metric}: {value}")

Test Set Design

  • Size: 30–100 examples is sufficient.

  • Diversity: Cover easy/medium/hard, edge cases, and different sub-categories.

  • Quality: Reference answers must be gold-standard correct. A wrong reference penalizes correct outputs.

Interpreting Results

Score TypeRangeMeaning
AI quality (1–5)1–2 Poor, 3 Adequate, 4 Good, 5 Excellent
NLP (0–1)<0.3 Wrong, 0.3–0.6 Partial, 0.6–0.8 Good, >0.8 Strong

With 50+ eval examples, a difference of ~0.3 points (on 1–5 scale) is usually meaningful.

Evaluating RFT Models

  1. Evaluate with a DIFFERENT rubric than the training grader — otherwise you measure overfitting to the grader.

  2. Use F1ScoreEvaluator for exact-match accuracy.

  3. Use SimilarityEvaluator to catch semantically correct but differently formatted answers.

  4. Compare against the base model, not just other fine-tunes.

Reference

Requirements and compatibility

Works with: Claude Code, Claude apps, OpenAI Codex, GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Gemini CLI, Kiro, OpenCode, Goose, Amp, Roo Code, JetBrains Junie, Factory Droid, Devin (ex-Windsurf), Mistral Vibe, OpenHands, Letta

“Works with” means the tool reads the open Agent Skills format; a skill written for one tool may use features others lack.

Needs: Needs Python

Security

What our scanner noticed· Low risk

  • Scripts that your agent may run

This skill includes scripts that your agent may run. Read them before you use it.

A static scan is not a guarantee. Skills are third-party content: review a skill before you let an agent use it.

Attribution and licence

Created by
Microsoft
Publisher
Microsoft (Official)
Source
microsoft/skills · .github/plugins/azure-skills/skills/microsoft-foundry/finetuning · commit 0696600
Licence
MIT License (redistribution allowed)
  • LICENSE (added by AutoGineer from .github/plugins/azure-skills/LICENSE)
  • ATTRIBUTION.md (written by AutoGineer)
Synced
Also distributed in
microsoft/azure-skills

AutoGineer is not affiliated with or endorsed by Microsoft or Microsoft.

Download ZIP

The ZIP holds the skill’s files, its licence files and an ATTRIBUTION.md. Download finetuning.zip