# Production Investigation

> Structured workflows for investigating production issues in Honeycomb — the sequence of tool calls (context priming, broad query, BubbleUp, trace analysis, verification) and how to chain results between steps to reach root causes. Trigger phrases: "investigate production issue", "debug latency spike", "find root cause", "use BubbleUp", "analyze traces", "debug an outage", "why is my API slow", "errors are increasing", "health check", "SLO burning", or any request to investigate or debug production problems.

- Skill: `honeycombio/production-investigation` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 4 files)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add honeycombio/production-investigation`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/honeycombio/production-investigation/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Integrations & APIs
- Author: honeycombio (https://skillmd.com/u/honeycombio)
- Updated: 2026-09-09
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/honeycombio/production-investigation

---


# Honeycomb Production Investigation

Structured workflows for debugging production issues. The MCP tools document their
own parameters — this skill focuses on the *sequence* of tool calls and how to
*interpret* results to reach a root cause.

## The Core Analysis Loop

This workflow implements the core analysis loop (**Define → Visualize → Investigate →
Evaluate**) from the **observability-fundamentals** skill. If BubbleUp returns nothing
useful, the issue is often an instrumentation gap — add the missing attributes (see the
**otel-instrumentation** skill) and try again.

## Investigation Workflow

### Step 1: Orient
1. `get_workspace_context` → environments and datasets
2. `get_slos` → any SLOs in violation? (frames severity)
3. `get_triggers` → any alerts firing? (narrows scope)
4. `find_queries` → has anyone investigated this before?

### Step 2: Characterize the Problem
Run a broad query to see the shape of the issue:
- **Latency spike**: P99(duration_ms), HEATMAP(duration_ms) grouped by service or route
- **Error surge**: count failed operation spans (`error=true`) by service/route/category, then
  separately count exception event rows using `event.name=exception` and `exception.type exists`;
  use sampled `trace.trace_id` values to drill into representative traces
- **Unknown**: COUNT grouped by service.name to find which service has anomalous volume

Also call `get_service_map` — it shows P95 durations between services and can immediately reveal which dependency is slow.

**Exception data has two query surfaces:** operation failures belong on spans (`error=true`, span
status, low-cardinality `exception.slug`/error category); full exception diagnostics may belong on
trace-correlated Logs API event rows. Do not assume `exception.*` exists on the containing span.
When investigating exceptions, discover the dataset schema first, query `event.name=exception`
with `exception.type exists` and `trace.trace_id exists`, take a sample, then pass its
`trace.trace_id` to `get_trace(show_events=true)`. For legacy span-event exceptions, also check
`name=exception` and `meta.signal_type=trace`; Logs API events use `event.name`/`body` and
`meta.signal_type=log`.

If a service uses an exception-promoting `LogRecordProcessor`, some `exception.*` fields may also
appear on the containing span. Treat that as an explicit client-side compatibility feature, not a
Honeycomb guarantee: the event row remains authoritative for full diagnostics, and absence of
parent-span fields does not mean the exception event is missing.

### Step 3: BubbleUp to Find Differentiators
This is the highest-value step. Once you have a query showing the anomaly:
1. Run `run_bubbleup` on the query result, selecting the outlier region
2. BubbleUp compares outlier vs baseline distributions across *all* columns automatically
3. Look for fields where the distributions differ significantly

**How to interpret BubbleUp results:**
- **Categorical fields** (dimensions): A value overrepresented in outliers points to a cause (e.g., `deployment.version=v2.3.1` is 90% of slow requests but only 20% of baseline)
- **Numeric fields** (measures): A shifted distribution shows correlated metrics (e.g., `db.query_duration` is much higher in outliers)
- **Typical root causes surfaced**: deployment version, region, user cohort, specific endpoint, feature flag

### Step 4: Drill Into Traces
After BubbleUp identifies suspects:
1. Add BubbleUp findings as WHERE filters to narrow results
2. Pick a representative trace ID
3. Call `get_trace` to fetch the full trace

**What to look for in the trace waterfall:**
- Spans with disproportionate duration vs parent (the bottleneck)
- Sequential spans that could be parallelized (N+1 query patterns)
- Error spans — check span events for stack traces
- Gaps between child spans (missing instrumentation or idle wait)
- Service boundaries (where the trace crosses services)

### Step 5: Verify Hypothesis
Form a hypothesis from BubbleUp + trace analysis, then confirm:
- Query WITH the suspected cause filtered in
- Query WITHOUT it (as a control)
- If the metrics diverge, you've found it

### Step 6: Record Findings
Call `create_board` with:
- A text panel summarizing the root cause (Markdown)
- The key query run PKs that identified the problem
- Related SLOs if applicable

## Investigation Patterns

### Latency Spike
HEATMAP first → BubbleUp the slow region → trace a slow request → verify with filtered queries

### Error Surge
Count failed operation spans by service/route/category → count Logs API exception events by
`event.name=exception` and `exception.type` → sample `trace.trace_id` → `get_trace(show_events=true)`
→ verify with filtered queries. Do not use `exception.message` on the parent span as the only
exception search.

### Deployment Regression
P99 grouped by deployment.version → BubbleUp comparing new vs old → trace from new version → verify

### Dependency Failure
`get_service_map` → P99 on the slow dependency → relational query (`any.service.name`) to measure user impact → trace an affected request

## Stay on the Path

If you find yourself reasoning any of these, follow the workflow anyway:
- "The cause is obvious, I can skip BubbleUp" — BubbleUp routinely surfaces causes that seem obvious in hindsight but weren't the first guess. It also catches *secondary* causes you'd miss entirely.
- "I already know it's a deployment issue" — verify with Step 5. Confirmation bias is strongest during incidents. Query with and without the suspected cause.
- "Traces confirmed it, no need to verify" — a single trace is an anecdote. The verification query proves the pattern holds across all traffic, not just one request.
- "This is a simple issue, the full workflow is overkill" — the workflow takes minutes; a wrong diagnosis during an incident costs hours.

## When Results Are Empty or Unclear

- **No results**: Check field names with `find_columns`, expand time range, verify environment/dataset
- **BubbleUp shows no signal**: Try a different time selection, add filters to isolate the anomaly more clearly, or select a different calculation
- **Trace missing spans**: Sampling, instrumentation gaps, or cross-environment trace split

## Additional Resources

### Reference Files
- **`${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/production-investigation/references/investigation-playbooks.md`** — Step-by-step playbooks for latency spikes, error surges, deployment regressions, dependency failures, SLO budget burn, and health checks
- **`${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/production-investigation/references/bubbleup-guide.md`** — Detailed BubbleUp usage: selection types, time specifications, pagination, result interpretation
- **`${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/skills/production-investigation/references/trace-exploration.md`** — Trace structure, get_trace parameters and view modes, waterfall analysis, span events and links

### Cross-References
- For the conceptual foundations of the core analysis loop, see the **observability-fundamentals** skill
- For query construction patterns, see the **query-patterns** skill
- For SLO/trigger context during investigations, see the **slos-and-triggers** skill

