Skip to content

Evidence for AI operations

No English page yet. Showing the Japanese source.

Back to the entrance

Desktop Agent/AI-RPA編

用語・参照用語・参照公式仕様のみ公式仕様のみ鮮度未確認鮮度を確定できない

記事状態: 公開 · 最終確認: 未確認

要点

「Desktop Agent/AI-RPAは、従来RPAをAIで置き換えた単一カテゴリではない。API、structured UI automation、vision/reasoning computer useは異なる失敗様式を持つ実行経路であり、同じidentity・policy・machine isolation・audit境界の下で使い分ける。GUI操作が可能であることは、業務ルール上正しいこと、権限上許可されること、再現可能であることを意味しない。」

現在の判断

  • Desktop automation has at least two execution paradigms: (A) selector/UIA/action-graph based deterministic RPA and (B) screenshot/vision/reasoning based CUA. They can share host/session/credential infrastructure but should not share the same reliability assumptions.
  • Windows UI Automation provides structured control semantics; CUA can act when selectors/APIs are unavailable or UI changes, but model reasoning introduces probabilistic action selection. Future Core should therefore prefer API/structured automation where available, deterministic UI automation next, and CUA as a bounded fallback or explicitly governed execution path rather than treating CUA as a drop-in replacement.
  • unattended foreground automation is an identity-and-session problem, not merely a model capability problem. Microsoft and UiPath both require execution infrastructure and user/session credentials or equivalent non-human identity configuration for foreground UI interaction.
  • Dedicated execution machines/VMs are operationally meaningful. Microsoft explicitly recommends dedicating a machine for computer use; same-machine jobs queue sequentially. Shared interactive desktops create interruption, state leakage, contention and attribution problems.
  • OS privilege boundaries remain effective constraints. Windows UIA cannot simply cross protected/high-integrity UI by default. AI reasoning does not remove UAC/uiAccess boundaries.
  • conventional RPA is not immune to platform drift: a 2026 Windows security update broke credential-dialog automation. Therefore deterministic selectors are more reproducible than CUA, but not invariant to OS/security changes.

どこまで当てはまるか

Enterprise AI Core / provider mapping / organization overlay / governance / benchmark / implementation / non-LLM component

詳しく理解する

なぜ重要か

EnterpriseのGUI自動化は、従来RPAの決定論的selector/UI Automationと、Computer-Using Agent(CUA)の視覚・推論ベース操作が同じdesktop surfaceへ収束しつつある。両者は失敗様式、権限境界、credential/session要件、監査可能性、コスト構造が異なるため、公開後アップデートでは「AI-RPA」を単一機能として扱わず実行層を分離する必要がある。

対象範囲と前提

Enterprise AI Core / provider mapping / organization overlay / governance / benchmark / implementation / non-LLM component

検討ポイント

  • Desktop Agentと従来RPAを同一の運用モデルで扱えるか。
  • unattended GUI executionで最低限分離すべきidentity/session/machine/privilege境界は何か。
  • GUI agent benchmarkの成功率を業務自動化の信頼性へ外挿できるか。
  • deterministic UI automationとvision/reasoning CUAをどう組み合わせるのが安全か。

EVIDENCE TABLE

  • official product docs | "Automate web and desktop apps with computer use" | Microsoft | https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-copilot-studio/computer-use | updated 2026-07-03 / accessed 2026-09-14 | Copilot Studio computer use; OpenAI CUA / Claude Sonnet 4.5/4.6 / Claude Opus 4.6; billing 5 or 15 Copilot Credits per step | locator: Licensing / model table / overview | VERIFIED_SPEC + PRODUCT_VOLATILE | support/context
  • official product docs | "Configure where computer use runs" | Microsoft | https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-copilot-studio/configure-where-computer-use-runs | updated 2026-08-03 / accessed 2026-09-14 | Power Automate for desktop >= 2.61.132.25266 for BYOM; dedicated machine recommendation; sequential queue on same machine | locator: Bring-your-own-machine / Run scheduling and queuing | VERIFIED_SPEC + PRODUCT_VOLATILE | support/limit
  • official product docs | "Run unattended desktop flows" | Microsoft | https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/power-automate/desktop-flows/run-unattended-desktop-flows | accessed 2026-09-14 | managed Windows user session; target-device session constraints; RDP permission required; authored vs unattended screen-resolution divergence | locator: unattended run behavior and session requirements | VERIFIED_SPEC + PRODUCT_VOLATILE | support/limit
  • official product docs | "Robots" | UiPath Orchestrator | https://docs.uipath.com/orchestrator/automation-cloud/latest/user-guide/about-robots | accessed 2026-09-14 | Automation Cloud current docs; unattended foreground UI requires host-machine credentials; background Session 0 can run without user credentials | locator: With credentials / Without credentials | VERIFIED_SPEC + PRODUCT_VOLATILE | support/context
  • official product docs | "Configuring automation capabilities" | UiPath Orchestrator | https://docs.uipath.com/orchestrator/automation-cloud/latest/user-guide/configuring-automation-capabilities | accessed 2026-09-14 | robot accounts as non-human identities; roles authorize Orchestrator resources; unattended execution bound to infrastructure | locator: Enabling unattended automation on a robot account | VERIFIED_SPEC + PRODUCT_VOLATILE | support
  • official platform spec/docs | "UI Automation Specification" | Microsoft Windows | https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/winauto/ui-automation-specification | accessed 2026-09-14 | Windows UI Automation element tree exposes controls/properties/patterns from desktop root | locator: UI Automation Elements / UI Automation Tree | VERIFIED_SPEC | context
  • official security docs | "UI Automation Security Overview" | Microsoft | https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/framework/ui-automation/ui-automation-security-overview | updated 2025-06-17 / accessed 2026-09-14 | uiAccess=false by default; protected UI/high-integrity interaction requires explicit trust/signing/manifest conditions | locator: User Account Control / Manifest File | VERIFIED_SPEC | limit/security
  • official failure report | "Fix: Power Automate desktop Windows credential dialog issues" | Microsoft | https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/troubleshoot/power-platform/power-automate/desktop-flows/windows-credentials-dialog-issues | updated 2026-03-20 / accessed 2026-09-14 | Jan/Feb 2026 Windows security updates caused credential-dialog automation failures; cloud unattended runs cannot use the local-admin workaround | locator: affected KBs / Workarounds | SOURCE_REPORT + PRODUCT_VOLATILE | counter/failure
  • primary research + author-maintained implementation | "OSWorld: Benchmarking Multimodal Agents for Open-Ended Tasks in Real Computer Environments" | Xie et al. / xlang-ai | https://github.com/xlang-ai/OSWorld | NeurIPS 2024; repo accessed 2026-09-14 | OSWorld / OSWorld-Verified; real computer tasks across Ubuntu/Windows/macOS | locator: README / public evaluation / citation | RESEARCH + OSS_PRACTICE | benchmark/context
  • primary research implementation | "OS-Blind: The Blind Spot of Agent Safety" | lime-nlp | https://github.com/limenlp/OS_Blind | accessed 2026-09-14 | 300 human-crafted tasks, 12 safety categories; environment-embedded and agent-initiated harms | locator: Dataset Overview | RESEARCH + OSS_PRACTICE | counter/security

利用できる条件

  • Microsoft Copilot Studio computer use: GA announced May 2026; requires generative orchestration; model choice and Copilot Credit billing are current/product-volatile. BYOM requires supported Power Automate for desktop version and machine registration/configuration.
  • Microsoft unattended desktop flows: Windows edition/session/RDP/NLA/Entra configuration constraints apply; sovereign cloud/hosted capacity limitations vary by feature.
  • UiPath: foreground unattended UI requires appropriate machine login credentials and configured robot/non-human identity; background Session 0 differs materially.
  • Protected Windows UI: uiAccess/signing/install-location/UAC conditions can block automation even when ordinary application UI is accessible.

実装・運用

MATURE for deterministic enterprise RPA; DEPLOYED/GA but rapidly evolving for CUA-assisted desktop automation. Recommended implementation pattern for future book: task router -> API/connector path when available -> deterministic RPA/UIA path -> governed CUA fallback; all paths terminate in common identity/policy/audit controls. Separate attended, unattended-foreground, background/session-0, and hosted/dedicated-machine profiles.

確認・評価方法

Use OSWorld/OSWorld-Verified for cross-application capability evaluation and OS-Blind for safety evaluation. Do not merge capability score with safety score. For organization acceptance, create a private evaluation corpus from real applications with: deterministic completion checks, forbidden-action checks, business-rule assertions, recovery/retry behavior, resolution/localization variants, and clean-state reset between runs.

セキュリティとプライバシー

least-privilege robot identity; dedicated machine/VM; prohibit unnecessary admin/uiAccess; policy-gate credential/system/security-setting changes; treat on-screen text as untrusted input for CUA.

セキュリティとプライバシー 2

screenshots/video/action traces may capture sensitive desktop content; retention/access/redaction policy required separately from model prompts. AUDIT: log task request, initiating human/service identity, robot/agent identity, machine/session, model/version when applicable, observations, intended action, executed action, result, approval/override and artifact changes. Screenshot-only replay is insufficient without structured action/result metadata.

コストと運用負荷

deterministic RPA cost is largely infrastructure/license/run-time; CUA adds per-step model/agent consumption. Microsoft currently documents 5 Copilot Credits per standard computer-use step and 15 for premium models; re-check at publication.

OPERABILITY

machine image/version pinning, queue depth, stuck-session recovery, credential rotation, selector drift detection, model regression tests and rollback are first-class operations concerns.

AUDITED BOUNDARY

Desktop Agent/AI-RPA is layered execution design; API, deterministic UI automation and vision/reasoning CUA have distinct failure modes. Model lists, credits, hosted-machine details and tenant availability remain PRODUCT_VOLATILE. GUI action capability does not establish business-rule correctness, authorization or reproducibility. Preserve all OPEN_UNKNOWN.

確認できていること

  • Desktop automation has at least two execution paradigms: (A) selector/UIA/action-graph based deterministic RPA and (B) screenshot/vision/reasoning based CUA. They can share host/session/credential infrastructure but should not share the same reliability assumptions.

  • Windows UI Automation provides structured control semantics; CUA can act when selectors/APIs are unavailable or UI changes, but model reasoning introduces probabilistic action selection. Future Core should therefore prefer API/structured automation where available, deterministic UI automation next, and CUA as a bounded fallback or explicitly governed execution path rather than treating CUA as a drop-in replacement.

  • unattended foreground automation is an identity-and-session problem, not merely a model capability problem. Microsoft and UiPath both require execution infrastructure and user/session credentials or equivalent non-human identity configuration for foreground UI interaction.

  • Dedicated execution machines/VMs are operationally meaningful. Microsoft explicitly recommends dedicating a machine for computer use; same-machine jobs queue sequentially. Shared interactive desktops create interruption, state leakage, contention and attribution problems.

  • OS privilege boundaries remain effective constraints. Windows UIA cannot simply cross protected/high-integrity UI by default. AI reasoning does not remove UAC/uiAccess boundaries.

  • conventional RPA is not immune to platform drift: a 2026 Windows security update broke credential-dialog automation. Therefore deterministic selectors are more reproducible than CUA, but not invariant to OS/security changes.

よくある失敗・反証

  • Vendor statements that CUA "adapts" to UI changes are product claims, not guarantees of task correctness across arbitrary layouts.

  • OSWorld/OSWorld-Verified evaluates bounded benchmark tasks; scores do not establish production SLA, security, or success on organization-specific apps.

  • Desktop agents can act correctly at the GUI level yet violate hidden workflow/business rules; application semantics must be separately validated.

  • State hazards include modal dialogs, focus theft, resolution/DPI variance, localization, screen locking, concurrent user sessions, stale credentials, pop-ups, remote-desktop differences and application updates.

  • Security hazards include credential phishing, data exfiltration, destructive OS actions, malware/code execution, deceptive agreements and prompt/instruction content rendered inside applications. OS-Blind demonstrates these as evaluation categories; it does not prove prevalence in any particular product deployment.

  • A robot/service identity with correct infrastructure permissions can still hold excessive application-level permissions. Orchestrator/machine authorization and target-application authorization are separate gates.

  • EA-050初回Packetとして、Core構造、current provider実装例、OS privilege/session failure、benchmark/safety反証、availability/cost gates、後続再確認点が揃ったため停止。次回はEA-051へ進む。

    ---

実務での使い方

  • Microsoft Copilot Studio computer use: GA announced May 2026; requires generative orchestration; model choice and Copilot Credit billing are current/product-volatile. BYOM requires supported Power Automate for desktop version and machine registration/configuration.

  • Microsoft unattended desktop flows: Windows edition/session/RDP/NLA/Entra configuration constraints apply; sovereign cloud/hosted capacity limitations vary by feature.

  • UiPath: foreground unattended UI requires appropriate machine login credentials and configured robot/non-human identity; background Session 0 differs materially.

  • Protected Windows UI: uiAccess/signing/install-location/UAC conditions can block automation even when ordinary application UI is accessible.

  • MATURE for deterministic enterprise RPA; DEPLOYED/GA but rapidly evolving for CUA-assisted desktop automation. Recommended implementation pattern for future book: task router -> API/connector path when available -> deterministic RPA/UIA path -> governed CUA fallback; all paths terminate in common identity/policy/audit controls. Separate attended, unattended-foreground, background/session-0, and hosted/dedicated-machine profiles.

  • Use OSWorld/OSWorld-Verified for cross-application capability evaluation and OS-Blind for safety evaluation. Do not merge capability score with safety score. For organization acceptance, create a private evaluation corpus from real applications with: deterministic completion checks, forbidden-action checks, business-rule assertions, recovery/retry behavior, resolution/localization variants, and clean-state reset between runs.

  • least-privilege robot identity; dedicated machine/VM; prohibit unnecessary admin/uiAccess; policy-gate credential/system/security-setting changes; treat on-screen text as untrusted input for CUA.

  • 公開後本文では「desktop execution hierarchy」をCore化し、API > structured deterministic automation > governed CUAという優先経路を候補にする。

  • provider mappingではMicrosoft Copilot Studio/Power AutomateとUiPathを、機能比較ではなくidentity/session/machine/queue/audit軸でマッピングする。

  • publication時にMicrosoft computer-use GA、model lineup、credit rate、Power Automate minimum version、UiPath current Automation Cloud docsを再確認する。

  • 企業向けTEST_PROFILEを作る場合は専用VM、無害なsynthetic app/data、non-admin test identity、network allowlist、clean snapshot restoreを用い、real credentials/production tenantは使わない。

  • Desktop Agent/AI-RPA is layered execution design; API, deterministic UI automation and vision/reasoning CUA have distinct failure modes. Model lists, credits, hosted-machine details and tenant availability remain PRODUCT_VOLATILE. GUI action capability does not establish business-rule correctness, authorization or reproducibility. Preserve all OPEN_UNKNOWN.

まだ確認できていないこと

  • EA-050-UNKNOWN-01

    provider横断でCUA action trace schemaを標準化できるか、business-rule violationを一般化して検出する評価標準、各providerのscreenshot/action retentionとtenant-controlled redaction差分、CUAとdeterministic RPAの自動fallback/rollback品質。

  • EA-050-UNKNOWN-CURRENTNESS

    外部根拠の再確認日がcanonical body/control-planeで確定していないため、currentnessはUNKNOWNとして保持する。日付を推測補完しない。

根拠資料

出典ID・検証情報・機械可読データ

根拠の種類と情報の鮮度は、ラベルとアイコンで確認できます。

記事ID
EA-050
最終確認日
—
提供元・モデル・プラン・利用環境
Microsoft
対象地域
—
元資料の全文と収録照合記録
WHY_THIS_MATTERS_TO_UPDATE

EnterpriseのGUI自動化は、従来RPAの決定論的selector/UI Automationと、Computer-Using Agent(CUA)の視覚・推論ベース操作が同じdesktop surfaceへ収束しつつある。両者は失敗様式、権限境界、credential/session要件、監査可能性、コスト構造が異なるため、公開後アップデートでは「AI-RPA」を単一機能として扱わず実行層を分離する必要がある。

SCOPE_ROUTING

Enterprise AI Core / provider mapping / organization overlay / governance / benchmark / implementation / non-LLM component

CLAIM_OR_RESEARCH_QUESTION
  • Desktop Agentと従来RPAを同一の運用モデルで扱えるか。
  • unattended GUI executionで最低限分離すべきidentity/session/machine/privilege境界は何か。
  • GUI agent benchmarkの成功率を業務自動化の信頼性へ外挿できるか。
  • deterministic UI automationとvision/reasoning CUAをどう組み合わせるのが安全か。
EVIDENCE TABLE
  • official product docs | "Automate web and desktop apps with computer use" | Microsoft | https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-copilot-studio/computer-use | updated 2026-07-03 / accessed 2026-09-14 | Copilot Studio computer use; OpenAI CUA / Claude Sonnet 4.5/4.6 / Claude Opus 4.6; billing 5 or 15 Copilot Credits per step | locator: Licensing / model table / overview | VERIFIED_SPEC + PRODUCT_VOLATILE | support/context
  • official product docs | "Configure where computer use runs" | Microsoft | https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-copilot-studio/configure-where-computer-use-runs | updated 2026-08-03 / accessed 2026-09-14 | Power Automate for desktop >= 2.61.132.25266 for BYOM; dedicated machine recommendation; sequential queue on same machine | locator: Bring-your-own-machine / Run scheduling and queuing | VERIFIED_SPEC + PRODUCT_VOLATILE | support/limit
  • official product docs | "Run unattended desktop flows" | Microsoft | https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/power-automate/desktop-flows/run-unattended-desktop-flows | accessed 2026-09-14 | managed Windows user session; target-device session constraints; RDP permission required; authored vs unattended screen-resolution divergence | locator: unattended run behavior and session requirements | VERIFIED_SPEC + PRODUCT_VOLATILE | support/limit
  • official product docs | "Robots" | UiPath Orchestrator | https://docs.uipath.com/orchestrator/automation-cloud/latest/user-guide/about-robots | accessed 2026-09-14 | Automation Cloud current docs; unattended foreground UI requires host-machine credentials; background Session 0 can run without user credentials | locator: With credentials / Without credentials | VERIFIED_SPEC + PRODUCT_VOLATILE | support/context
  • official product docs | "Configuring automation capabilities" | UiPath Orchestrator | https://docs.uipath.com/orchestrator/automation-cloud/latest/user-guide/configuring-automation-capabilities | accessed 2026-09-14 | robot accounts as non-human identities; roles authorize Orchestrator resources; unattended execution bound to infrastructure | locator: Enabling unattended automation on a robot account | VERIFIED_SPEC + PRODUCT_VOLATILE | support
  • official platform spec/docs | "UI Automation Specification" | Microsoft Windows | https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/winauto/ui-automation-specification | accessed 2026-09-14 | Windows UI Automation element tree exposes controls/properties/patterns from desktop root | locator: UI Automation Elements / UI Automation Tree | VERIFIED_SPEC | context
  • official security docs | "UI Automation Security Overview" | Microsoft | https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/framework/ui-automation/ui-automation-security-overview | updated 2025-06-17 / accessed 2026-09-14 | uiAccess=false by default; protected UI/high-integrity interaction requires explicit trust/signing/manifest conditions | locator: User Account Control / Manifest File | VERIFIED_SPEC | limit/security
  • official failure report | "Fix: Power Automate desktop Windows credential dialog issues" | Microsoft | https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/troubleshoot/power-platform/power-automate/desktop-flows/windows-credentials-dialog-issues | updated 2026-03-20 / accessed 2026-09-14 | Jan/Feb 2026 Windows security updates caused credential-dialog automation failures; cloud unattended runs cannot use the local-admin workaround | locator: affected KBs / Workarounds | SOURCE_REPORT + PRODUCT_VOLATILE | counter/failure
  • primary research + author-maintained implementation | "OSWorld: Benchmarking Multimodal Agents for Open-Ended Tasks in Real Computer Environments" | Xie et al. / xlang-ai | https://github.com/xlang-ai/OSWorld | NeurIPS 2024; repo accessed 2026-09-14 | OSWorld / OSWorld-Verified; real computer tasks across Ubuntu/Windows/macOS | locator: README / public evaluation / citation | RESEARCH + OSS_PRACTICE | benchmark/context
  • primary research implementation | "OS-Blind: The Blind Spot of Agent Safety" | lime-nlp | https://github.com/limenlp/OS_Blind | accessed 2026-09-14 | 300 human-crafted tasks, 12 safety categories; environment-embedded and agent-initiated harms | locator: Dataset Overview | RESEARCH + OSS_PRACTICE | counter/security
FINDINGS
  • Desktop automation has at least two execution paradigms: (A) selector/UIA/action-graph based deterministic RPA and (B) screenshot/vision/reasoning based CUA. They can share host/session/credential infrastructure but should not share the same reliability assumptions.
  • Windows UI Automation provides structured control semantics; CUA can act when selectors/APIs are unavailable or UI changes, but model reasoning introduces probabilistic action selection. Future Core should therefore prefer API/structured automation where available, deterministic UI automation next, and CUA as a bounded fallback or explicitly governed execution path rather than treating CUA as a drop-in replacement.
  • unattended foreground automation is an identity-and-session problem, not merely a model capability problem. Microsoft and UiPath both require execution infrastructure and user/session credentials or equivalent non-human identity configuration for foreground UI interaction.
  • Dedicated execution machines/VMs are operationally meaningful. Microsoft explicitly recommends dedicating a machine for computer use; same-machine jobs queue sequentially. Shared interactive desktops create interruption, state leakage, contention and attribution problems.
  • OS privilege boundaries remain effective constraints. Windows UIA cannot simply cross protected/high-integrity UI by default. AI reasoning does not remove UAC/uiAccess boundaries.
  • conventional RPA is not immune to platform drift: a 2026 Windows security update broke credential-dialog automation. Therefore deterministic selectors are more reproducible than CUA, but not invariant to OS/security changes.
LIMITS / COUNTEREVIDENCE / FAILURE ENVELOPE
  • Vendor statements that CUA "adapts" to UI changes are product claims, not guarantees of task correctness across arbitrary layouts.
  • OSWorld/OSWorld-Verified evaluates bounded benchmark tasks; scores do not establish production SLA, security, or success on organization-specific apps.
  • Desktop agents can act correctly at the GUI level yet violate hidden workflow/business rules; application semantics must be separately validated.
  • State hazards include modal dialogs, focus theft, resolution/DPI variance, localization, screen locking, concurrent user sessions, stale credentials, pop-ups, remote-desktop differences and application updates.
  • Security hazards include credential phishing, data exfiltration, destructive OS actions, malware/code execution, deceptive agreements and prompt/instruction content rendered inside applications. OS-Blind demonstrates these as evaluation categories; it does not prove prevalence in any particular product deployment.
  • A robot/service identity with correct infrastructure permissions can still hold excessive application-level permissions. Orchestrator/machine authorization and target-application authorization are separate gates.
AVAILABILITY_GATES
  • Microsoft Copilot Studio computer use: GA announced May 2026; requires generative orchestration; model choice and Copilot Credit billing are current/product-volatile. BYOM requires supported Power Automate for desktop version and machine registration/configuration.
  • Microsoft unattended desktop flows: Windows edition/session/RDP/NLA/Entra configuration constraints apply; sovereign cloud/hosted capacity limitations vary by feature.
  • UiPath: foreground unattended UI requires appropriate machine login credentials and configured robot/non-human identity; background Session 0 differs materially.
  • Protected Windows UI: uiAccess/signing/install-location/UAC conditions can block automation even when ordinary application UI is accessible.
IMPLEMENTATION_STATE

MATURE for deterministic enterprise RPA; DEPLOYED/GA but rapidly evolving for CUA-assisted desktop automation. Recommended implementation pattern for future book: task router -> API/connector path when available -> deterministic RPA/UIA path -> governed CUA fallback; all paths terminate in common identity/policy/audit controls. Separate attended, unattended-foreground, background/session-0, and hosted/dedicated-machine profiles.

BENCHMARK_OR_EVAL

Use OSWorld/OSWorld-Verified for cross-application capability evaluation and OS-Blind for safety evaluation. Do not merge capability score with safety score. For organization acceptance, create a private evaluation corpus from real applications with: deterministic completion checks, forbidden-action checks, business-rule assertions, recovery/retry behavior, resolution/localization variants, and clean-state reset between runs.

SECURITY

least-privilege robot identity; dedicated machine/VM; prohibit unnecessary admin/uiAccess; policy-gate credential/system/security-setting changes; treat on-screen text as untrusted input for CUA.

PRIVACY

screenshots/video/action traces may capture sensitive desktop content; retention/access/redaction policy required separately from model prompts. AUDIT: log task request, initiating human/service identity, robot/agent identity, machine/session, model/version when applicable, observations, intended action, executed action, result, approval/override and artifact changes. Screenshot-only replay is insufficient without structured action/result metadata.

COST

deterministic RPA cost is largely infrastructure/license/run-time; CUA adds per-step model/agent consumption. Microsoft currently documents 5 Copilot Credits per standard computer-use step and 15 for premium models; re-check at publication.

OPERABILITY

machine image/version pinning, queue depth, stuck-session recovery, credential rotation, selector drift detection, model regression tests and rollback are first-class operations concerns.

SAFE_WORDING_FOR_FUTURE_BOOK

「Desktop Agent/AI-RPAは、従来RPAをAIで置き換えた単一カテゴリではない。API、structured UI automation、vision/reasoning computer useは異なる失敗様式を持つ実行経路であり、同じidentity・policy・machine isolation・audit境界の下で使い分ける。GUI操作が可能であることは、業務ルール上正しいこと、権限上許可されること、再現可能であることを意味しない。」

UPDATE_WORK_HANDOFF
  • 公開後本文では「desktop execution hierarchy」をCore化し、API > structured deterministic automation > governed CUAという優先経路を候補にする。
  • provider mappingではMicrosoft Copilot Studio/Power AutomateとUiPathを、機能比較ではなくidentity/session/machine/queue/audit軸でマッピングする。
  • publication時にMicrosoft computer-use GA、model lineup、credit rate、Power Automate minimum version、UiPath current Automation Cloud docsを再確認する。
  • 企業向けTEST_PROFILEを作る場合は専用VM、無害なsynthetic app/data、non-admin test identity、network allowlist、clean snapshot restoreを用い、real credentials/production tenantは使わない。
OPEN_UNKNOWN

provider横断でCUA action trace schemaを標準化できるか、business-rule violationを一般化して検出する評価標準、各providerのscreenshot/action retentionとtenant-controlled redaction差分、CUAとdeterministic RPAの自動fallback/rollback品質。

STOP_CONDITION

EA-050初回Packetとして、Core構造、current provider実装例、OS privilege/session failure、benchmark/safety反証、availability/cost gates、後続再確認点が揃ったため停止。次回はEA-051へ進む。

---

AUDITED_BOUNDARY

Desktop Agent/AI-RPA is layered execution design; API, deterministic UI automation and vision/reasoning CUA have distinct failure modes. Model lists, credits, hosted-machine details and tenant availability remain PRODUCT_VOLATILE. GUI action capability does not establish business-rule correctness, authorization or reproducibility. Preserve all OPEN_UNKNOWN.

  • EVD-EA-050-URL-800526331074研究資料研究資料根拠の出所: SOURCE_PACKET_REFERENCE

    1) official product docs | "Automate web and desktop apps with computer use" | Microsoft |

    裏付ける内容
    —
    確認日
    —
    出典・実験ID
    SRC-EA-050-URL-800526331074
    検証箇所
    EVIDENCE TABLE · 1) official product docs | "Automate web and desktop apps with computer use" | Microsoft | https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-copilot-studio/computer-use
    適用範囲
    EVIDENCE TABLE
    出典・来歴
    SOURCE_PACKET_REFERENCE_PROJECTED
    限界
    元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。
  • EVD-EA-050-URL-3CAB0D84B00C研究資料研究資料根拠の出所: SOURCE_PACKET_REFERENCE

    2) official product docs | "Configure where computer use runs" | Microsoft |

    裏付ける内容
    —
    確認日
    —
    出典・実験ID
    SRC-EA-050-URL-3CAB0D84B00C
    検証箇所
    EVIDENCE TABLE · 2) official product docs | "Configure where computer use runs" | Microsoft | https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-copilot-studio/configure-where-computer-use-runs
    適用範囲
    EVIDENCE TABLE
    出典・来歴
    SOURCE_PACKET_REFERENCE_PROJECTED
    限界
    元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。
  • EVD-EA-050-URL-4DDE3CD11E3A研究資料研究資料根拠の出所: SOURCE_PACKET_REFERENCE

    3) official product docs | "Run unattended desktop flows" | Microsoft |

    裏付ける内容
    —
    確認日
    —
    出典・実験ID
    SRC-EA-050-URL-4DDE3CD11E3A
    検証箇所
    EVIDENCE TABLE · 3) official product docs | "Run unattended desktop flows" | Microsoft | https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/power-automate/desktop-flows/run-unattended-desktop-flows
    適用範囲
    EVIDENCE TABLE
    出典・来歴
    SOURCE_PACKET_REFERENCE_PROJECTED
    限界
    元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。
  • EVD-EA-050-URL-3ED7A6CAE4A3研究資料研究資料根拠の出所: SOURCE_PACKET_REFERENCE

    4) official product docs | "Robots" | UiPath Orchestrator |

    裏付ける内容
    —
    確認日
    —
    出典・実験ID
    SRC-EA-050-URL-3ED7A6CAE4A3
    検証箇所
    EVIDENCE TABLE · 4) official product docs | "Robots" | UiPath Orchestrator | https://docs.uipath.com/orchestrator/automation-cloud/latest/user-guide/about-robots
    適用範囲
    EVIDENCE TABLE
    出典・来歴
    SOURCE_PACKET_REFERENCE_PROJECTED
    限界
    元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。
  • EVD-EA-050-URL-C5F3CD81FD74研究資料研究資料根拠の出所: SOURCE_PACKET_REFERENCE

    5) official product docs | "Configuring automation capabilities" | UiPath Orchestrator |

    裏付ける内容
    —
    確認日
    —
    出典・実験ID
    SRC-EA-050-URL-C5F3CD81FD74
    検証箇所
    EVIDENCE TABLE · 5) official product docs | "Configuring automation capabilities" | UiPath Orchestrator | https://docs.uipath.com/orchestrator/automation-cloud/latest/user-guide/configuring-automation-capabilities
    適用範囲
    EVIDENCE TABLE
    出典・来歴
    SOURCE_PACKET_REFERENCE_PROJECTED
    限界
    元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。
  • EVD-EA-050-URL-580B8A0A8C2D研究資料研究資料根拠の出所: SOURCE_PACKET_REFERENCE

    6) official platform spec/docs | "UI Automation Specification" | Microsoft Windows |

    裏付ける内容
    —
    確認日
    —
    出典・実験ID
    SRC-EA-050-URL-580B8A0A8C2D
    検証箇所
    EVIDENCE TABLE · 6) official platform spec/docs | "UI Automation Specification" | Microsoft Windows | https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/winauto/ui-automation-specification
    適用範囲
    EVIDENCE TABLE
    出典・来歴
    SOURCE_PACKET_REFERENCE_PROJECTED
    限界
    元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。
  • EVD-EA-050-URL-D7F007864A6D研究資料研究資料根拠の出所: SOURCE_PACKET_REFERENCE

    7) official security docs | "UI Automation Security Overview" | Microsoft |

    裏付ける内容
    —
    確認日
    —
    出典・実験ID
    SRC-EA-050-URL-D7F007864A6D
    検証箇所
    EVIDENCE TABLE · 7) official security docs | "UI Automation Security Overview" | Microsoft | https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/framework/ui-automation/ui-automation-security-overview
    適用範囲
    EVIDENCE TABLE
    出典・来歴
    SOURCE_PACKET_REFERENCE_PROJECTED
    限界
    元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。
  • EVD-EA-050-URL-51BC8AA1690C研究資料研究資料根拠の出所: SOURCE_PACKET_REFERENCE

    8) official failure report | "Fix: Power Automate desktop Windows credential dialog issues" | Microsoft |

    裏付ける内容
    —
    確認日
    —
    出典・実験ID
    SRC-EA-050-URL-51BC8AA1690C
    検証箇所
    EVIDENCE TABLE · 8) official failure report | "Fix: Power Automate desktop Windows credential dialog issues" | Microsoft | https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/troubleshoot/power-platform/power-automate/desktop-flows/windows-credentials-dialog-issues
    適用範囲
    EVIDENCE TABLE
    出典・来歴
    SOURCE_PACKET_REFERENCE_PROJECTED
    限界
    元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。
  • EVD-EA-050-URL-FFBEF51B3785研究資料研究資料根拠の出所: SOURCE_PACKET_REFERENCE

    9) primary research + author-maintained implementation | "OSWorld: Benchmarking Multimodal Agents for Open-Ended Tasks in Real Computer Environments" | Xie et al. / xlang-ai |

    裏付ける内容
    —
    確認日
    —
    出典・実験ID
    SRC-EA-050-URL-FFBEF51B3785
    検証箇所
    EVIDENCE TABLE · 9) primary research + author-maintained implementation | "OSWorld: Benchmarking Multimodal Agents for Open-Ended Tasks in Real Computer Environments" | Xie et al. / xlang-ai | https://github.com/xlang-ai/OSWorld
    適用範囲
    EVIDENCE TABLE
    出典・来歴
    SOURCE_PACKET_REFERENCE_PROJECTED
    限界
    元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。
  • EVD-EA-050-URL-DD3C5207FF0D研究資料研究資料根拠の出所: SOURCE_PACKET_REFERENCE

    10) primary research implementation | "OS-Blind: The Blind Spot of Agent Safety" | lime-nlp |

    裏付ける内容
    —
    確認日
    —
    出典・実験ID
    SRC-EA-050-URL-DD3C5207FF0D
    検証箇所
    EVIDENCE TABLE · 10) primary research implementation | "OS-Blind: The Blind Spot of Agent Safety" | lime-nlp | https://github.com/limenlp/OS_Blind
    適用範囲
    EVIDENCE TABLE
    出典・来歴
    SOURCE_PACKET_REFERENCE_PROJECTED
    限界
    元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。
  • EA-050-R11-RESEARCH研究資料研究資料根拠の出所: AUDITED_CANONICAL_RESEARCH_PACKET

    EA-050 監査済みresearch / canonical revision binding

    裏付ける内容
    - Desktop automation has at least two execution paradigms: (A) selector/UIA/action-graph based deterministic RPA and (B) screenshot/vision/reasoning based CUA. They can share host/session/credential infrastructure but should not share the same reliability assumptions. - Windows UI Automation provides structured control semantics; CUA can act when selectors/APIs are unavailable or UI changes, but model reasoning introduces probabilistic action selection. Future Core should therefore prefer API/structured automation where available, deterministic UI automation next, and CUA as a bounded fallback or explicitly governed execution path rather than treating CUA as a drop-in replacement. - unattended foreground automation is an identity-and-session problem, not merely a model capability problem. Microsoft and UiPath both require execution infrastructure and user/session credentials or equivalent non-human identity configuration for foreground UI interaction. - Dedicated execution machines/VMs are operationally meaningful. Microsoft explicitly recommends dedicating a machine for computer use; same-machine jobs queue sequentially. Shared interactive desktops create interruption, state leakage, contention and attribution problems. - OS privilege boundaries remain effective constraints. Windows UIA cannot simply cross protected/high-integrity UI by default. AI reasoning does not remove UAC/uiAccess boundaries. - conventional RPA is not immune to platform drift: a 2026 Windows security update broke credential-dialog automation. Therefore deterministic selectors are more reproducible than CUA, but not invariant to OS/security changes.
    確認日
    —
    出典・実験ID
    COMM-051-EA0050
    検証箇所
    COMM-051-EA0050 · EA-050-R5-LEGACY-MIGRATION-20261008-R1 · content/staging/EA-050.md
    適用範囲
    監査済みEA本文・canonical revision・既存Source Graph relationの範囲。欠損currentnessは推測で閉じない。
    出典・来歴
    AUDIT_PASS_CANONICAL_BINDING
    限界
    canonical監査・revision bindingの存在を示す。外部ソースcurrentnessが本文またはcontrol-planeで確定していない場合は、currentnessをUNKNOWNのまま保持する。
  • EA-050-R11-WEB-READBACK実装資料実装資料根拠の出所: IMPLEMENTATION_READBACK

    EA-050 Web body identity / canonical readback

    裏付ける内容
    canonical staging bodyのSHA-256一致とR9 canonical ledger readbackをProduction projectionの入力として検証する。
    確認日
    —
    出典・実験ID
    WEBBODY-EA0050-R8-0191A0E1
    検証箇所
    WEBBODY-EA0050-R8-0191A0E1 · content/staging/EA-050.md · EA-050-R5-LEGACY-MIGRATION-20261008-R1
    適用範囲
    R9/R10 canonical readback後のProduction生成時body identity。
    出典・来歴
    CANONICAL_READBACK_BODY_HASH_MATCH
    限界
    body identity/readbackは本文claim自体の真偽や外部ソースの最新性を追加保証しない。
出典ID
COMM-051-EA0050, SRC-EA-050-URL-800526331074, SRC-EA-050-URL-3CAB0D84B00C, SRC-EA-050-URL-4DDE3CD11E3A, SRC-EA-050-URL-3ED7A6CAE4A3, SRC-EA-050-URL-C5F3CD81FD74, SRC-EA-050-URL-580B8A0A8C2D, SRC-EA-050-URL-D7F007864A6D, SRC-EA-050-URL-51BC8AA1690C, SRC-EA-050-URL-FFBEF51B3785, SRC-EA-050-URL-DD3C5207FF0D, WEBBODY-EA0050-R8-0191A0E1
追跡中のUNKNOWN ID
EA-050-UNKNOWN-01, EA-050-UNKNOWN-CURRENTNESS
再確認のきっかけ
canonical revision/publication state change · body artifact hash change · source currentness change · new contradiction or implementation readback

機械検査: 通過 — Automated validation does not guarantee accuracy or authorize execution.

    同じ記事IDの機械可読データです。