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

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

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

I’ve been looking into the Document Processing → Restore Original / Sync File Names With Object Title action in Extension Kit for M-Files and I can restore original file names or sync file names with previous object titles. The documentation shows how to configure wildcards to scope which files are affected — but it doesn’t mention anything about selecting a specific version based on workflow state (for example: restore the last version where workflow status was “Freigegeben”/Approved).

My question:
Is there a way to target a specific version for restore (e.g. the last version that had workflow status = Approved), not just the latest version matching a wildcard?

Here’s what I understand so far:

• The “Restore original” action works on the current object and just reverts files in a first run to the last document which wasnt a PDF. Second run on the same object just restores a PDF...

• The configuration options are limited to filename wildcards — no built-in parameter appears to specify a target version number or a property filter like workflow status.

So the question is:

Does Extension Kit offer a way to select/trigger a restore for a specific historical version based on workflow status or version metadata (e.g. Approved)?
Or is the only way to achieve this via standard M-Files rollback or a custom combination of versioning + property rules?

Would love to hear if someone’s configured this or has ideas how to implement it cleanly.

Cheers

Daniel

We're sharing two updates today.

Extension Kit Core v26.1.0 released

The latest Extension Kit Core version introduces a new XML Processing module, support for Microsoft Foundry models in Document AI, and a few handy improvements to Document Processing and HTTP Integration.

👉 Read the full release notes.

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

GRAPI - GraphQL API for M-Files is here

We’ve released GRAPI — a modern, high-performance API for working with M-Files vault data using GraphQL.

GRAPI generates a strongly-typed schema directly from your vault and supports advanced querying, filtering, and multi-vault access.

👉 See documentation

Kind regards, 

Ines

We’re excited to introduce Document AI — a new module in Extension Kit Core that brings more than 11,000 AI models into your M-Files environment.

Document AI enables automatic document classification and metadata extraction in M-Files using Microsoft Foundry, without the need for custom development.

What you can do with Document AI:

• Use 11,000+ AI models for invoices, contracts, HR documents, and more
• Configure everything without coding using a rule-based configuration
• Automatically classify documents and extract metadata directly in M-Files

🎥 Watch a short video showcasing Document AI in action on a real-life invoice use case — from configuring AI models in Microsoft Foundry to the final result in M-Files. 👉 Watch the video

🎓 Learn more about Document AI

Kind regards, 

Ines

If you are planning to upgrade to M-Files 25.12 and are using the Object metadata changed trigger in Extension Kit Core, we recommend updating Extension Kit to the latest release (25.12.1) before upgrading M-Files.

If Extension Kit is not updated, the Object metadata changed trigger will not work correctly after upgrading to M-Files 25.12.

⚠️ Recommended action:

Update Extension Kit Core to version 25.12.1 before upgrading to M-Files 25.12.

Kind regards,

Ines