Instrumentation review

Who it is for

Teams that already emit some request logs or traces and want to know whether those records can support a usage picture, or whether they will collapse into timestamp soup.

What you leave with

A gap list: which usage questions your logs can answer today, which they cannot, and the smallest set of fields to add before a full assessment is worth running.

Scope

One logging or tracing setup as it stands. We do not redesign your observability stack; we read what a usage assessment would actually consume.

Included

• Review of sample log lines, trace spans, or export schemas you provide
• A mapped list of usage questions versus available fields
• Notes on identity, retries, and parent/child calls
• A two-hour debrief

Not included

• Implementing new logging
• Choosing a vendor
• A full usage reconstruction

Who does the work

Wei Liang Tan leads. Aisha Rahman reviews the gap list before it leaves the office.

Sequence

1. Receive samples. You send redacted log lines, a schema, or sit with us on a shared screen for one hour.
2. Ask the basic questions. Can we tell which screen fired? Which user path? Whether this line is a retry? Which model served it?
3. Hand back the gaps. A short document, not a programme of work.

Duration

Five to seven working days after samples arrive.

Where it happens

Remote reading is usual. An SS15 sitting session is available if samples cannot leave the building.

What to prepare

Redacted samples that still show field names, or a supervised live view. A list of the usage questions you already wish you could answer.

Limits

Without samples we cannot review. We will not invent a schema for an app we have not seen.

Fee basis

From RM 3,200. If the review immediately leads to a usage assessment of the same app, we credit RM 1,200 toward that fee.

Next step