Nice little gadget but not a must for every occasion.

As mentioned, both in terms of operating the tool (creator) and navigating/viewing the content there (audience/reader), it sees room for being more human-intuitive so that it doesn't create background stress for a potential new user to start using it ("background" stress because Miro is surely not a complex tool, but still, if it's not yet the easiest / simplest, sometimes it's hard to make people aware of the benefits of adopting to this new small gadget, or say aware and actually willing to take those benefits). Simplicity is the most critical, at least for my type of working environment, where we don't really see any external/explicit values from using such a tool but only internal efficiency raise, which is often not even deemed necessary.

As mentioned already, Miro itself is not a complex tool to use. However, the benefits it provides are also mostly smaller internal efficiency raise here and there; namely, although the "cost" of using it is not high, the "benefit" might just not be big enough to let everyone embrace it. Hence integrating Miro into the daily working environment can be relatively easy technical-wise but hard context-wise.

Better fit: workshops where you need participants' short feedback constantly, esp when you need to organize those feedback into pre-defined scopes/structures. E.g., analyzing product features (can be participants' notes) targeting different market segments (can be the preset structures already provided on canvas). Less fit: when you need to present intensive prepared content. Although Miro does has the features to incorporate materials such as slides deck, currently, these features are not the easiest to use. In addition, when you have, e.g., many detailed slides (e.g. with critical charts/figures), the view on a Miro board might not be very eye-friendly.