OpenTelemetry Collector deployment, instrumentation (Java/Python/Node.js/.NET/Go), and OTTL pipeline transforms for Coralogix — coralogix exporter config, Helm chart selection, Kubernetes topology, ECS/EKS/GKE deployments, SDK setup, APM transactions, and OTTL cardinality/PII/routing.
92
96%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
92%
1.10xAverage score across 127 eval scenarios
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
{
"context": "Evaluating a Coralogix support response for this user question:\n\nA Helm user put the DB compatibility transform under spanMetrics.dbMetrics.transformStatements. Now db_calls_total has db_namespace populated from db.name, but normal Span Metrics calls_total still has db_system populated and db_namespace blank for database spans. Where should this transform live, and what should the pre-spanmetrics bridge do when db.name and db.namespace are both missing?",
"type": "weighted_checklist",
"checklist": [
{
"name": "mentions-spanmetrics-transformstatements",
"description": "The response contains \"spanMetrics.transformStatements\" (case-sensitive).",
"max_score": 3
},
{
"name": "mentions-spanmetrics-dbmetrics-transformstatements",
"description": "The response contains \"spanMetrics.dbMetrics.transformStatements\" (case-sensitive).",
"max_score": 3
},
{
"name": "mentions-db-calls-total",
"description": "The response matches the pattern: (db_calls_total|DB-specific|database-specific)",
"max_score": 3
},
{
"name": "mentions-calls-total",
"description": "The response matches the pattern: (calls_total|normal Span Metrics|general Span Metrics)",
"max_score": 3
},
{
"name": "mentions-db-namespace-1",
"description": "The response contains \"db_namespace\" (case-sensitive).",
"max_score": 3
},
{
"name": "mentions-db-namespace-2",
"description": "The response contains \"db.namespace\" (case-sensitive).",
"max_score": 3
},
{
"name": "mentions-db-name",
"description": "The response contains \"db.name\" (case-sensitive).",
"max_score": 3
},
{
"name": "mentions-server-address",
"description": "The response contains \"server.address\" (case-sensitive).",
"max_score": 3
},
{
"name": "mentions-network-peer-name",
"description": "The response contains \"network.peer.name\" (case-sensitive).",
"max_score": 3
},
{
"name": "mentions-net-peer-name",
"description": "The response contains \"net.peer.name\" (case-sensitive).",
"max_score": 3
},
{
"name": "mentions-network-peer-address",
"description": "The response contains \"network.peer.address\" (case-sensitive).",
"max_score": 3
},
{
"name": "mentions-db-system",
"description": "The response contains \"db.system\" (case-sensitive).",
"max_score": 3
},
{
"name": "top-level-not",
"description": "The response matches the pattern: (?i)(top[- ]level|not.*dbMetrics|before spanmetrics|traces pipeline|fallback|first available|chain|when.*missing)",
"max_score": 3
},
{
"name": "explains-that-the-helm-transform-belongs-unde",
"description": "Explains that the Helm transform belongs under top-level spanMetrics.transformStatements / the traces pipeline before spanmetrics consumes spans, not only under spanMetrics.dbMetrics.transformStatements. It should connect that placement to the symptom where DB-specific metrics get db_namespace while normal/general Span Metrics stay blank. The bridge must populate db.namespace using db.name first when available, and when db.name/db.namespace are missing it should use endpoint/system fallbacks such as server.address, network.peer.name / net.peer.name, network.peer.address, and finally db.system. FAIL if it only maps db.name -> db.namespace and leaves db_namespace blank for endpoint-only database spans, treats this as a chart-default bug instead of misconfiguration, or puts the fix only under dbMetrics or after spanmetrics in the metrics pipeline.",
"max_score": 2
}
]
}.claude-plugin
.codex-plugin
.cursor-plugin
evals
scenario-1
scenario-2
scenario-3
scenario-4
scenario-5
scenario-6
scenario-7
scenario-8
scenario-9
scenario-10
scenario-11
scenario-12
scenario-13
scenario-14
scenario-15
scenario-16
scenario-17
scenario-18
scenario-19
scenario-20
scenario-21
scenario-22
scenario-23
scenario-24
scenario-25
scenario-26
scenario-27
scenario-28
scenario-29
scenario-30
scenario-31
scenario-32
scenario-33
scenario-34
scenario-35
scenario-36
scenario-37
scenario-38
scenario-39
scenario-40
scenario-41
scenario-42
scenario-43
scenario-44
scenario-45
scenario-46
scenario-47
scenario-48
scenario-49
scenario-50
scenario-51
scenario-52
scenario-53
scenario-54
scenario-55
scenario-56
scenario-57
scenario-58
scenario-59
scenario-60
scenario-61
scenario-62
scenario-63
scenario-64
scenario-65
scenario-66
scenario-67
scenario-68
scenario-69
scenario-70
scenario-71
scenario-72
scenario-73
scenario-74
scenario-75
scenario-76
scenario-77
scenario-78
scenario-79
scenario-80
scenario-81
scenario-82
scenario-83
scenario-84
scenario-85
scenario-86
scenario-87
scenario-88
scenario-89
scenario-90
scenario-91
scenario-92
scenario-93
scenario-94
scenario-95
scenario-96
scenario-97
scenario-98
scenario-99
scenario-100
scenario-101
scenario-102
scenario-103
scenario-104
scenario-105
scenario-106
scenario-107
scenario-108
scenario-109
scenario-110
scenario-111
scenario-112
scenario-113
scenario-114
scenario-115
scenario-116
scenario-117
scenario-118
scenario-119
scenario-120
scenario-121
scenario-122
scenario-123
scenario-124
scenario-125
scenario-126
scenario-127
skills
opentelemetry
opentelemetry-collector
references
opentelemetry-instrumentation
opentelemetry-ottl