Add an Agent Observability data retention page and link pricing by gsvigruha · Pull Request #39676 · DataDog/documentation

gsvigruha · 2026-09-02T18:10:00Z

What does this PR do? What is the motivation?

Agent Observability had no documentation for data retention, and nothing in the docs linked to its pricing page. This PR adds a retention page, links pricing, and corrects existing pages that described retention incorrectly.

New page

llm_observability/data_retention.md — retention periods for traces and spans, experiment traces, experiment definitions, annotated objects, dataset records, prompts, and metrics. Also covers what happens to existing data when a retention period changes, and that retention length affects what you are billed.

Changes to existing pages

llm_observability/_index.md — adds a short Pricing section stating that Agent Observability is billed on LLM spans ingested, linking the Agent Observability pricing page. Nothing in the docs linked to it before.
llm_observability/investigate/annotation_queues.md — the retention table listed annotation labels as retained indefinitely, and did not mention that annotating a trace extends the trace's retention.
llm_observability/investigate/metrics.md — fixed two links pointing at a data retention anchor that did not exist, and pointed the metric retention links at the canonical Data Retention Periods page rather than one of its aliases.
Side nav — adds the Data Retention entry.

Notes for reviewers

No rates are stated in the docs. The pricing page is the single source for those, and this PR links to it from the landing page and the retention page.
Retention periods were checked against internal configuration and product sources, and match the Agent Observability entry already present on Data Retention Periods. That shared page does not list annotations, prompts, or experiment definitions, so it is now less complete than the new page — worth a follow-up if we want them in both.

Merge readiness

Ready for merge

For Datadog employees:

⚠️ Your branch name MUST follow the <name>/<description> convention and include the forward slash (/). If you've already created your PR with an incorrect branch name, please rename your branch and open a fresh PR.
🤖 New: Comment with /review to run an automated check that catches common issues before a Documentation team member reviews your PR.

AI assistance

Drafted with Claude Code. Retention periods were verified against internal configuration rather than written from memory, and reviewed manually.

Additional notes

The title still needs a Jira ticket key ([DOCS-XXXXX]), and the description a matching Fixes DOCS-XXXXX line.

Document retention periods for traces, experiment traces, annotated objects, dataset records, prompts, and metrics on a single page. Also correct the annotation queues retention table, which listed annotation labels as retained indefinitely, and fix a broken link to a data retention anchor that did not exist. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

The 3-year period for records in the current version runs from creation and is not extended by reads. Only the 90-day period for previous versions resets when a version is used. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Experiment retention pairs with the trace retention tier only on plans with pre-purchased capacity. Without it, experiment traces are retained for 15 days rather than 90. Note that custom contracts may not follow the tier pairings. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

github-actions · 2026-09-02T18:37:28Z

Preview links (active after the `build_preview` check completes)

New or renamed files

https://docs-staging.datadoghq.com/gergely.svigruha/agent-obs-pricing-retention/llm_observability/data_privacy_security_and_retention

Removed or renamed files (these should redirect)

https://docs-staging.datadoghq.com/gergely.svigruha/agent-obs-pricing-retention/llm_observability/data_privacy_security_and_rbac

Modified Files

Experiment definitions and aggregate results carry a flat 90-day period that does not scale with the trace retention tier, unlike experiment traces. State annotation label availability in terms of the annotated object rather than asserting label deletion. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Add a billing page covering how Agent Observability is metered, what counts as an LLM span, usage estimation from provider request counts, and the Sensitive Data Scanner allotment. Rates link to the pricing page rather than being restated. Scope the data retention page to retention periods, moving the commercial detail to the billing page, and correct it against the current plan structure: retention is keyed on plan rather than on the trace retention period, and retention changes apply retroactively to unexpired spans. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Place it after Incident Response at the end of the per-product billing pages, before the cloud integrations, matching its position on the billing index. Renumber the following entries to keep weights contiguous. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Match the name used throughout the docs and parallel the other provider rows, instead of introducing a name used nowhere else. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Point the pricing link at the Agent Observability product anchor, and add the billing page to the retention page's further reading. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

The shared pricing page carries a section per product defining its billable unit, but had none for Agent Observability. Add one covering LLM spans, and link to the Agent Observability billing page. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Follow the APM billing model: a rate table for the free tier and the on-demand span rates, plus worked scenarios showing how a monthly bill is calculated at three usage levels. Note that committed and enterprise pricing is negotiated separately. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Sections on the pricing page define each product's billable unit and leave rates to the product billing page, as the APM section does. Drop the duplicated Agent Observability rates so they have a single owner. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

State the annotation label period as 90 days rather than deferring to the annotated object, and note that extending retention by annotating is not billed. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Replace the separate questions about experiments and indexed spans with one section listing everything included and billed only on LLM spans: evaluations, experiments, patterns, annotation queues, datasets, prompt management, and the playground. Tie the Sensitive Data Scanner section to that list, since it is the one inclusion with a usage allotment. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Move the how-to into the Changing your retention period section, where a reader looks for it, and have the traces section link down to it rather than repeating the contact route. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

State that all features are included and nothing is charged extra, rather than enumerating them, and keep the Sensitive Data Scanner allotment as the stated exception. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Evaluations and patterns can run with your own LLM provider key instead of the Datadog-provided model, in which case your provider bills you for that model usage directly. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Evaluations and patterns are not charged extra when run with the customer's own LLM provider key, rather than BYOK being an alternative to an unmetered default. State annotations and datasets as included, and experiments as metered on LLM spans like production traces. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Evaluations can run without a customer provider key through a free preview with limited capacity, so BYOK is the route for production volume. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Evaluations and patterns are not charged extra either way: they run on a Datadog-provided model by default, with BYOK as an option for production volume. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

State that all features are included rather than listing them, and reduce the evaluations and patterns note to the two model options. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Links: point the metric retention links at the canonical Data Retention Periods page rather than one of its aliases, and add that page to further reading. Grammar: fix a dangling qualifier in the experiment traces intro, an ambiguous pronoun in the annotation labels sentence, and the repeated preposition in the experiment traces table. Say that a free-form note does not extend retention, rather than that no retention applies to it. Conventions: use Trace Explorer, the name used elsewhere in these docs. Deduplication: the billing page defined an LLM span twice, carried the sales contact three times, and stated the Sensitive Data Scanner allotment in three places. Each now appears once. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

A product pricing page already exists, so remove the rate table and worked billing scenarios and link to it from the billing page intro, its further reading, and the pricing page section. Correct the product slug to llm-observability. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

The section had grown to six bullets, more than any other product section on the page. Keep the LLM span definition and the links, and leave what is included and how to estimate usage to the billing page. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Remove the Agent Observability billing page, the pricing page section, the billing index card, and the billing nav entry, restoring account_management/billing to its previous state. A product pricing page already covers rates. Link that pricing page from the Agent Observability landing page and from the data retention page instead. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

The page linked rates without stating the connection. Lead the section with the reason retention matters commercially, then how to change it. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Move the data retention pointer out of the pricing section and into further reading. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Move the retention content into Data Privacy, Security, and Retention as a Data retention section, and retire the standalone page. Keeping the existing file preserves its URL and alias. Repoint the links from the metrics, annotation queues, and landing pages, and restore the side nav to its previous shape apart from the renamed entry. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Move the page to data_privacy_security_and_retention and alias the old path so existing links keep resolving. The earlier data_security_and_rbac alias is preserved. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

joepeeples · 2026-09-03T16:05:40Z

Opened DOCS-15609 to assign a Docs writer and follow up with editorial review.

brett0000FF

Thanks, looks good! Just left a few comments where something was unclear to me.

brett0000FF · 2026-09-04T22:18:02Z

+| Experiment definitions and aggregate results | 90 days from creation                                                                     |
+| Annotated traces, spans, and sessions        | 90 days from the time of annotation, or your span retention period if that is longer      |
+| Annotation labels                            | 90 days, matching the object they annotate                                                |
+| Dataset records                              | 3 years, regardless of your span retention period                                         |


Could we distinguish current and previous dataset versions in this row? The three-year statement reads as applying to all records, but the Dataset records section below and the linked Dataset versioning docs give previous versions a 90-day window that resets when used.

Suggested wording: “Current version: 3 years. Previous versions: 90 days, reset when used.”

Please also qualify the opening sentence under “Dataset records” as “Records in the current version of a dataset…” so the two summaries agree.

brett0000FF · 2026-09-04T22:18:55Z

+
+If your organization's span retention period is longer than 90 days, annotated objects are retained for that longer period instead.
+
+Annotation labels are retained for the same 90 days as the object they annotate, and are no longer viewable after that object expires.


Do annotation labels follow the annotated object’s retention period, including when it exceeds 90 days, or do labels expire separately at 90 days? The preceding paragraph allows longer object retention, so “the same 90 days” leaves that case unclear.

If labels follow the object, could we say “Annotation labels are retained for as long as the object they annotate” and update the label rows in both retention tables accordingly?

Also, could the final sentence in this section distinguish notes by whether they are attached, rather than calling them “free-form”? The annotation-queue docs also use “free-form notes” for trace-review observations. Suggested wording: “Adding a note that is not attached to a trace, span, or session does not extend any object’s retention.”

brett0000FF · 2026-09-04T22:21:01Z

+| On-demand                           | 15 days                    |
+| Committed (monthly or annual)       | 90 days                    |


Which experiment trace retention period applies to Free-tier organizations? If they are included in one of these rows, could we clarify that briefly so readers can identify their retention period?

github-actions Bot added the Architecture Everything related to the Doc backend label Sep 2, 2026

gsvigruha and others added 2 commits September 2, 2026 14:30

gsvigruha and others added 8 commits September 2, 2026 14:38

Use Google Vertex AI in the usage estimation table

7151ee3

Match the name used throughout the docs and parallel the other provider rows, instead of introducing a name used nowhere else. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Link pricing to the Agent Observability product section

a656962

Point the pricing link at the Agent Observability product anchor, and add the billing page to the retention page's further reading. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

gsvigruha changed the title ~~Add Agent Observability data retention page~~ Add Agent Observability data retention and billing pages Sep 2, 2026

gsvigruha and others added 16 commits September 2, 2026 16:48

Confirm annotation retention as 90 days at no charge

a661ef8

State the annotation label period as 90 days rather than deferring to the annotated object, and note that extending retention by annotating is not billed. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Keep annotation retention on the retention page only

67278f1

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Simplify the included-features section

fa7a12b

State that all features are included and nothing is charged extra, rather than enumerating them, and keep the Sensitive Data Scanner allotment as the stated exception. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Note the free preview for Datadog-provided evaluation models

988f1f3

Evaluations can run without a customer provider key through a free preview with limited capacity, so BYOK is the route for production volume. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Present BYOK as an option alongside the free default

d7210b6

Evaluations and patterns are not charged extra either way: they run on a Datadog-provided model by default, with BYOK as an option for production volume. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Condense the included-features section

046226a

State that all features are included rather than listing them, and reduce the evaluations and patterns note to the two model options. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Reduce the evaluations and patterns note to the BYOK option

fe0d524

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Say that retention length affects billing

0c0d62d

The page linked rates without stating the connection. Lead the section with the reason retention matters commercially, then how to change it. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Keep the pricing section to pricing

9e875e1

Move the data retention pointer out of the pricing section and into further reading. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

gsvigruha marked this pull request as ready for review September 3, 2026 14:45

gsvigruha requested a review from a team as a code owner September 3, 2026 14:45

gsvigruha changed the title ~~Add Agent Observability data retention and billing pages~~ Add an Agent Observability data retention page and link pricing Sep 3, 2026

gsvigruha and others added 2 commits September 3, 2026 11:21

Rename the page to match its new scope

68ff510

Move the page to data_privacy_security_and_retention and alias the old path so existing links keep resolving. The earlier data_security_and_rbac alias is preserved. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

joepeeples added the editorial review Waiting on a more in-depth review label Sep 3, 2026

Merge branch 'master' into gergely.svigruha/agent-obs-pricing-retention

b308b53

brett0000FF approved these changes Sep 4, 2026

View reviewed changes

Navigation Menu

Uh oh!

Add an Agent Observability data retention page and link pricing - #39676

Add an Agent Observability data retention page and link pricing#39676
gsvigruha wants to merge 31 commits into
masterfrom
gergely.svigruha/agent-obs-pricing-retention

gsvigruha commented Sep 2, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Sep 2, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

joepeeples commented Sep 3, 2026

Uh oh!

brett0000FF left a comment

Uh oh!

brett0000FF Sep 4, 2026

Uh oh!

brett0000FF Sep 4, 2026

Uh oh!

brett0000FF Sep 4, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants


		If your organization's span retention period is longer than 90 days, annotated objects are retained for that longer period instead.

		Annotation labels are retained for the same 90 days as the object they annotate, and are no longer viewable after that object expires.

		\| On-demand \| 15 days \|
		\| Committed (monthly or annual) \| 90 days \|

Uh oh!

Conversation

gsvigruha commented Sep 2, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

What does this PR do? What is the motivation?

Merge readiness

For Datadog employees:

AI assistance

Additional notes

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Sep 2, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Preview links (active after the build_preview check completes)

New or renamed files

Removed or renamed files (these should redirect)

Modified Files

Uh oh!

joepeeples commented Sep 3, 2026

Uh oh!

brett0000FF left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

brett0000FF Sep 4, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

brett0000FF Sep 4, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

brett0000FF Sep 4, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

gsvigruha commented Sep 2, 2026 •

edited

Loading

github-actions Bot commented Sep 2, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Preview links (active after the `build_preview` check completes)