Conversation Design Best Practices

Overview

Building an agent that works technically is only half the job. An agent can trigger the right topics, extract the right entities, and return the correct information, but if the conversation feels awkward, confusing, or untrustworthy, users will abandon it. In government environments, where agents represent the agency and may handle sensitive information, the stakes are even higher.

Conversation design is the discipline of crafting how your agent communicates. It covers everything from the greeting message to how the agent recovers when it does not understand a user’s request. Good conversation design is invisible to users because everything feels natural. Bad conversation design is painfully obvious.

This video covers the principles and practices that make the difference.

What You’ll Learn

• Design principles: The foundational rules for effective agent conversations
• Natural dialogue: How to write agent messages that sound human and professional
• Error handling: How to recover gracefully when things go wrong
• Fallback behaviors: How to design your safety net for unrecognized requests
• Government considerations: Accessibility, trust, privacy, and compliance requirements

Script

Hook: Good conversations by design

An agent that works technically but frustrates users is still a failure. If users try your agent once, get a confusing response, and never come back, all the development effort was wasted.

Conversation design is the difference between an agent people use once and one they rely on daily. It is the discipline of thinking through how your agent communicates at every step, from the first greeting to error recovery to saying goodbye.

In the next twelve minutes, you will learn the principles that make agent conversations feel natural, helpful, and trustworthy, especially in government environments where your agent represents the agency itself.

Principles of conversation design

Conversation design is a discipline, not an afterthought. Just as you would not deploy a government website without considering usability, you should not deploy an agent without considering the conversation experience.

Four core principles guide effective conversation design. First, be clear. Users should always know what your agent can do and what it cannot. Ambiguity breeds frustration. When a user starts a conversation, they should immediately understand the agent’s purpose and how to interact with it.

Second, be concise. Respect the user’s time. Government employees are busy. They came to your agent for a quick answer, not a lecture. Keep responses focused and direct. If you can say it in two sentences, do not use five.

Third, be helpful. Every response should move the user closer to their goal. If the agent cannot directly answer a question, it should point the user in the right direction. A dead-end response is never acceptable.

Fourth, be honest. Never pretend your agent knows something it does not. If the agent cannot answer a question, it should say so clearly and offer an alternative. Users lose trust quickly when they receive incorrect or fabricated information, and in government contexts, incorrect information can have real consequences.

Understand your users’ mental model. Most users approach your agent with expectations shaped by consumer chatbots, virtual assistants, or previous frustrating experiences with automated systems. Government users may start with lower trust and higher skepticism. Your conversation design needs to build confidence quickly by being accurate, responsive, and transparent.

Design for the eighty percent. Identify the most common user paths and optimize those conversations. They should be smooth, fast, and satisfying. Then plan for the twenty percent: the edge cases, unusual requests, and misunderstandings. These are where fallback behaviors and error handling earn their keep.

In government contexts, your agent’s tone and accuracy carry extra weight. An agent that represents a federal agency is an extension of that agency’s public presence. Every response reflects on the organization’s credibility and professionalism.

Writing natural dialogue

Your agent should sound like a helpful, knowledgeable colleague, not a bureaucratic form letter and not a customer service script. Natural dialogue builds rapport and makes users comfortable interacting with your agent repeatedly.

Start with your greeting. The greeting is the user’s first impression. It should welcome the user, clearly state what the agent can help with, and provide a starting point. A good greeting might be: “Welcome to the IT Help Desk. I can help with password resets, software requests, hardware issues, and general IT questions. What do you need help with today?” That single message tells the user who the agent is, what it can do, and invites them to begin.

When writing agent messages, follow these guidelines. Use contractions where they feel natural. “I’ll look that up for you” sounds more human than “I will look that up for you.” Vary your sentence structure so the agent does not sound repetitive. Keep messages to two or three sentences when possible. If you need to convey more information, break it into multiple messages or use a numbered list for clarity.

When asking questions, ask one question at a time. Make the expected response format clear. If you need a date, say “What date do you need? For example, March 15 or 3/15/2026.” If you are offering choices, list them clearly. Avoid open-ended questions when a specific answer is needed.

Confirmation messages are critical. After the user provides important information, repeat it back. “You’d like to request annual leave from March 15 through March 19. Is that correct?” This prevents errors and shows the user their input was understood.

For government agents, aim for a tone that is professional but not bureaucratic. Direct but not cold. Helpful but not overly familiar. Avoid humor, sarcasm, or overly casual language. Your users may include senior officials, contractors, and members of the public, all of whom expect a professional interaction.

Here is a practical example. A robotic message might say: “Your request has been received. It will be processed. You will be contacted.” A natural version says: “Got it. I’ve submitted your request and you should hear back within two business days. Is there anything else I can help with?” Same information, but the natural version feels like a conversation.

Handling errors and misunderstandings

Errors are inevitable. Users will type things your agent does not understand. They will ask about topics outside your agent’s scope. They will provide information in unexpected formats. External systems your agent depends on will occasionally fail. What matters is how your agent handles these situations.

There are four main types of errors to design for. The first is when the user’s input cannot be understood. The agent does not know which topic to trigger. For this, ask the user to rephrase with examples: “I didn’t quite catch that. Could you try rephrasing? For example, you can ask me about password resets, software requests, or hardware issues.”

The second is when the user asks about something outside the agent’s scope. For this, acknowledge the request and redirect: “I handle IT support questions, so I’m not able to help with HR inquiries. You can reach the HR team at hr@agency.gov or extension 4321.”

The third is when the user provides invalid or incomplete information. For this, explain what is needed with a specific example: “I need a date to process your request. Please provide it in a format like March 15 or 3/15/2026.”

The fourth is when an external system fails. For this, apologize and offer alternatives: “I’m having trouble connecting to the ticketing system right now. You can try again in a few minutes, or you can submit your request directly by emailing support@agency.gov.”

Implement a three-strike rule. If the agent fails to understand the user three times in a row, stop asking them to rephrase. Instead, escalate to a human or provide direct contact information. Never leave users trapped in an infinite loop of “I didn’t understand that” messages. That is the fastest way to destroy trust.

Every error message should do three things: tell the user what went wrong in plain language, tell them what to do next, and offer an alternative path in case the first option does not work.

Here is a government scenario. A user asks your unclassified agent about classified program information. Your agent should not attempt to answer, and it should not just say “I don’t understand.” Instead, it should recognize the sensitivity and respond appropriately: “I’m not able to provide information about classified programs through this channel. Please contact your security office directly for classified information requests.”

Creating helpful fallback behaviors

The Fallback topic is your agent’s safety net. It catches every message that does not match any other topic. The default fallback message in Copilot Studio is typically something like “I’m sorry, I didn’t understand that.” That is not good enough for a production agent.

Design a better fallback. Start by acknowledging the limitation honestly. Then help the user get back on track. A strong fallback message might say: “I wasn’t able to find an answer for that. I can help with password resets, software requests, hardware issues, and network troubleshooting. Would you like to try one of those, or would you prefer to speak with someone on the IT team?”

This fallback does four things. It acknowledges the problem. It lists what the agent can do. It invites the user to try again. And it offers a human alternative.

Customize your Fallback topic in Copilot Studio by adding a message that lists the agent’s capabilities, a question node asking if the user would like to rephrase their request, and an escalation path if they choose to connect with a human.

Escalation design deserves careful thought. Decide when to escalate: after repeated misunderstandings, when the user explicitly asks for a person, for sensitive or complex topics, or when the user expresses frustration. Decide how to escalate: you can route to a Teams channel, send an email to a support queue, provide a phone number, or integrate with a live agent system. Decide what to pass along: include a summary of the conversation so far, the user’s original question, and any context the agent collected. Nobody wants to repeat themselves after being transferred.

The Escalate system topic in Copilot Studio handles explicit escalation requests. Customize it with your agency’s specific contact information and handoff procedures.

Here is a government scenario. Your agent handles unclassified HR questions about benefits, leave, and payroll. When a user asks about a security clearance investigation, the agent should not attempt to answer. Instead, the fallback or a dedicated topic should escalate to the security office with appropriate guidance: “Security clearance questions are handled by the Personnel Security Office. I can provide their contact information, or I can transfer you to a team member who can assist.”

Government-specific considerations

Government agents carry responsibilities that commercial agents may not. Design your conversations with these requirements in mind.

Accessibility is not optional. Federal agencies are subject to Section 508 requirements. Write messages that work well with screen readers by using clear, logical sentence structure. Avoid relying on visual formatting alone, as not all channels render rich text the same way. Keep response lengths manageable so they do not overwhelm assistive technology. Follow the Federal Plain Writing Act by using simple, direct language that all users can understand regardless of education level or technical background.

Authority and trust are paramount. Your agent represents the agency. Every response reflects on organizational credibility. When providing policy information, include sourcing: “According to the agency’s telework policy updated in January 2026…” Add disclaimers for information that may change or that users should verify: “This is general guidance. For your specific situation, please consult with your supervisor or HR representative.” Make clear when information is general guidance versus binding policy.

Privacy and sensitivity require deliberate design choices. Never ask for more information than necessary to complete the task. If your agent needs to collect personally identifiable information, warn the user first: “To look up your leave balance, I’ll need your employee ID. This information is used only for this query and is not stored.” Handle sensitive topics like disciplinary actions, medical information, or security matters by redirecting to appropriate human channels rather than attempting automated responses.

Include required compliance language where applicable. Link to official policies when providing guidance. State privacy notices when collecting data. And if your agent serves multiple audiences, such as employees, contractors, and the public, design language that works across different knowledge levels and expectations.

Test with representative users from your agency. What makes sense to the person who built the agent may not make sense to the people who use it. Observe real users interacting with your agent, note where they get confused or frustrated, and iterate on those conversation points.

Close: Design for trust

Let us recap what makes agent conversations effective. Conversation design is what separates agents that users tolerate from agents that users trust. The four pillars, clear, concise, helpful, and honest, guide every message your agent sends.

Error handling and fallback behaviors protect the user experience when things go wrong. And in government environments, they go wrong more consequentially because users may be making decisions based on the information your agent provides.

Government agents carry extra responsibility. They represent the agency, serve diverse audiences, and must comply with accessibility and privacy requirements. These are not constraints that limit your agent. They are design principles that make it better.

Here are your action steps. Review every message in your agent for clarity and tone. Read them aloud. Do they sound like a helpful colleague or a bureaucratic form? Improve your fallback topic with specific guidance about what your agent can do and clear escalation options. Test with real users from your target audience and watch for confusion points. Add disclaimers, accessibility considerations, and privacy notices where appropriate.

The best conversation design is invisible. Users do not notice it because everything just works. They ask a question, they get a clear answer, and they move on with their day. That is the standard to aim for.

Sources & References

• Build great bots with Copilot Studio — Microsoft’s official guidance on conversation design principles and best practices for building effective agents
• Create and edit topics in Copilot Studio — Documentation for implementing conversation design patterns through topics and conversation flows
• Microsoft Copilot Studio documentation — Comprehensive documentation hub for all Copilot Studio capabilities