Operations | Monitoring | ITSM | DevOps | Cloud

Incident response often spans a patchwork of tools, handoffs, and manual steps. An engineer gets paged, a team investigates the issue, the incident commander coordinates the response, SREs document decisions, and somebody (anybody!) writes the postmortem. Every handoff introduces more context switching, increasing the risk of critical information loss, and ultimately slowing resolution.

When production breaks, the clues are everywhere but the story is scattered. RUM sessions, APM traces, metrics, and logs allow Datadog to tell you part of the story. What’s missing is your service ownership quirks, your team's conventions, or the three-year-old workaround buried in a comment that explains why a certain endpoint behaves the way it does.

Senior engineers are the pillars of SRE programs—not only do they have the leadership to manage incidents well, they also have the tribal knowledge to understand the technical causes of tricky issues. But when the know-how is confined to a few individuals, it greatly limits the effectiveness of your SRE team.

AI is generating code at 10x human speed, but we’re not shipping software 10x faster. Agents have a quality problem, and we still can’t trust their output without validation. Breaking the code review model didn’t help. So what would it take to autonomously ship code that’s actually trustworthy? Join us to explore what an agentic harness looks like when the SDLC is the harness, a validation system that spans intent, CI, staging, and production, with context flowing bidirectionally between all stages.