Why LLM Observability Differs From APM
Ill_Deer_156 · reddit · 2026-07-13
After integrating LLM features into an existing APM, the author found the results lacking: traditional monitoring excels at catching slow requests but struggles to detect hallucinations, incorrect policy conclusions, or unwanted agent tool calls.
The post argues that LLM observability requires a different set of signals than standard APM, specifically:
- Complete prompt/response traces
- Tool call parameters and execution results
- Retrieval context in RAG scenarios
The author wants to know how others handle this: extending existing APMs or adopting dedicated LLM observability tools, and which traces are actually useful versus just noise during production incidents.
More from coding & agent
- A better path to agent autonomy is running waves, finding friction, and iterating — JnBrymn · 2026-07-22
- Coding agents are heading toward an AI-writes, AI-reviews, human-approves workflow — aftahi_ai · 2026-07-22
- oMLX 0.5.2 adds Mac menu-bar stats, low-bit decode kernels, and faster downloads — awnihannun · 2026-07-22
- GitHub review bot hits its PR limit and forces a 39-minute cooldown — DanielLockyer · 2026-07-22
- Max reasoning effort appears to be mobile-only in Codex Remote, not desktop — GabGarrett · 2026-07-22
- A Reddit demo argues online stores should expose carts and pricing through MCP — gelembjuk · 2026-07-22