Extension Kit Core v26.3.0 is now available. Here are the key updates from the latest release:

• OCR for PDFs & images in Document AI
• Faster SFTP transfers
• More flexibility in object & property operations
• Improved CSV reporting support

👉🏼 Read the full release notes

👉🏼 Visit the Download Center to upgrade to the latest version.

Kind regards, 
Ines

Adding multiple images to a bookmark is easy to configure in the Word Writer module. In the screenshot below, you can see the configuration of the file action that inserts all images from a multi-select property into a single bookmark in Word, named PreImages.

There are two types of “Insert image” behavior: Replace and Append. In both cases, all images from your multi-select property will be added to the document - the difference is what happens when you run the rule again.

If you select Replace, any previously added images will be removed when the rule is re-run, and the new set of images will be inserted. If you select Append, the behavior is as follows:

• You add 4 images to your multi-select property and run the rule for the first time
• All 4 images are inserted into the document
• Later, you remove those 4 images and select 2 new ones
• The 2 new images are added, but the original 4 remain in the document

If you expect changes to the images, I recommend using the Replace option, as it is more intuitive for this use case. For example, if the end user changes just one image, all images will be removed and then reinserted, avoiding duplicate content.

At the moment, we do not support additional formatting—such as adding spacing between images or modifying layout beyond size. Images are inserted next to each other. Also, if you manually edit the document in Word after the rule runs, you may lose the ability to replace images later, since a bookmark treats a newline (\n) as the end of its content.

In short, Extension Kit can help you insert multiple images into Word, but you may still need to make manual adjustments afterward. Once edits are made, re-running the rule (e.g., to replace a few images) may no longer be possible.

I hope this configuration works for you and helps you build your case.

Best regards,
Nika

The ideal solution would be to have a word template with one bookmark for pre images and one for post images, and then have Ext.Kit insert all of the images listed in the related property. Would that be possible?  As I read the info in the configuration a file action will insert only the first file matching the filename wildcard. This means that you would need to insert multiple bookmarks for pre images and likewise for post images. Given that the number of pictures and their file names can vary from case to case it would be difficult if not impossible to solve the challenge described. Any suggestions?

Join our upcoming live webinar on extending AI capabilities in M-Files without coding.

Learn how to connect M-Files to external AI services such as Microsoft Foundry, Google AI, or any REST-based service using Extension Kit Core — and turn those integrations into practical business scenarios.

You’ll see how to:

• Automatically extract structured invoice data, including header fields and line items
• Analyze unstructured and scanned documents using AI
• Generate objects automatically based on M-Files data using external AI services

🗓 April 21, 2026

⏰ 3:00 PM CEST

👉🏼 Register here

Looking forward to seeing you there!

Kind regards,

Ines

Even though we’ve already discussed this topic through other channels, I’ll share a summary here in case others have the same question.

Property setter functionality has already been introduced in several commonly used modules where it adds clear value. This is especially true for modules that execute actions without directly modifying the processed object’s properties, where it can otherwise be difficult to confirm whether the rule has completed successfully. Examples of such modules include HTTP, Word Writer, Object Operations, and similar ones.

For Document Processing, each action automatically writes an entry to the PD Version label, which can be used to track whether the rule execution was successful. You can use this as a workaround until property setter support is added.

We’re continuing to expand property setter support across additional modules over time, based on demand and prioritization.

Best regards,

Nika

We would find it very helpful if all modules in Extension Kit supported the ability to use a property setter after a rule has completed successfully.

With the Orchestrator, rules simply run in sequence. In scenarios where a task continues in the background, this is difficult to handle cleanly. For example, when merging multiple PDFs, the job runs in the background, and the simplest solution would be to set a property once the rule has finished successfully, for example through an on-success action.

This would provide a reliable way to confirm that the process has been completed and allow the next steps to continue with certainty.

The delay options in the Orchestrator are not really a practical solution for this kind of scenario. There are workarounds, but none of them are as clean or effective as having a property setter available directly after successful rule execution.

We believe this would make many workflows more robust, transparent, and easier to manage.

Is this feature already planned, or can it be expected in an upcoming release?

Kind regards
Jeremias
IMCT AG

Extension Kit Core version 26.2.0 has been released, bringing new features across XML Processing, Orchestrator, Extended Auto Properties, and more:

• New Data Extraction action in the XML Processing module
• Added USERGROUPS expression to automatically sync user groups
• New Act as User option in Orchestrator to control which user is shown as Last modified after rule execution

Plus additional improvements and logging enhancements.

👉🏼 Read the full release notes

👉🏼 Visit the Download Center to upgrade to the latest version

Kind regards,

Ines

The Update Styles feature that I mentioned earlier was referenced in the wrong context. It is actually used to update styles that are already predefined in the document; it cannot be used to apply a style to a table through this feature.

We consider what you are experiencing to be a bug — Word Writer rules should not override existing styles. We are planning to address and fix this by the end of Q2.

Best regards,
Nika