💡 AI/LLM Observability Workflow Extension for Morgan #383
Replies: 1 comment
Weekly UpdateWhat Changed
Sources: CNCF OpenTelemetry Graduation announcement (prnewswire.com, May 2026), OTel Profiles Alpha blog post (opentelemetry.io, March 2026), OTel Graduated Now What blog (opentelemetry.io, 2026). Updated Assessment
RecommendationAdvance — OTel graduation removes the "alpha/beta risk" objection. The AI observability extension should be designed as an OTel-native workflow from the start, leveraging GenAI semantic conventions and the new Profiles signal for comprehensive AI workload visibility. |
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Summary
Extend Morgan's observability workflow (CO) to cover AI/LLM-specific monitoring: OpenTelemetry GenAI semantic conventions, LLM golden signals (token throughput, latency-per-token, cost-per-query), hallucination rate SLIs, model drift detection, and AI agent trace visualization. As 40% of enterprise apps embed AI agents by 2026, observability planning that covers traditional services but ignores AI workloads leaves teams blind to their fastest-growing operational risk.
Market Signal
OpenTelemetry GenAI semantic conventions are now standardized with auto-instrumentation packages for OpenAI, Anthropic, LangChain, and LlamaIndex. Datadog Watchdog, New Relic, and every major observability platform now support AI-specific dashboards. PagerDuty and AWS DevOps Agent correlate LLM telemetry with incident data. The industry has moved from "should we monitor AI?" to "how do we monitor AI systematically?" — the planning methodology gap is where Morgan adds value.
User Signal
The project's observability workflow (CO) currently covers only traditional service monitoring (golden signals, RED/USE methods). As BMAD users increasingly build AI-powered applications (the BMAD ecosystem is 49K+ stars and growing rapidly), the lack of AI-specific observability guidance is a significant gap. The existing GenAI semantic conventions make this immediately actionable.
Technical Opportunity
The observability workflow already has a multi-step structure (step-01-init through step-05-validation) with templates. Adding AI observability sections to step-02 (metrics strategy) and step-03 (alerting strategy) is a natural content extension. Morgan's existing golden signals framework can be extended with AI-specific signals. The production readiness checklist template can add AI observability verification items.
Assessment
Adversarial Review
Strongest objection: OpenTelemetry docs and vendor platforms already provide AI observability guidance. Teams can instrument without Morgan's workflow.
Rebuttal: Tool vendors provide instrumentation, not planning methodology. No tool tells teams which SLIs to define for their specific AI use case, how to set error budgets for hallucination rates, how to structure alerting for model drift vs. data drift, or how to design dashboards for LLM cost visibility. That architectural planning gap — deciding WHAT to observe before HOW to instrument — is precisely Morgan's value proposition, consistent with how the existing workflow handles traditional observability.
Suggested Next Step
Add conditional AI/LLM observability sections to the existing
bgr-3-create-observabilityworkflow steps (step-02 metrics strategy, step-03 alerting) and extend the observability plan template with an AI/LLM monitoring section. Gate activation on a new config flag inmodule.yaml(e.g.,ai_workloads: true/false).All reactions