feat: added config for COAT metrics

[nlchung]

What does this PR do?

Adds some DCA metrics to the cluster-agent COAT profile in defaultProfiles, enabling fleet-wide visibility into Container Platform feature adoption and health. Each metric is configured with aggregate_tags to retain only low-cardinality categorical tags; high-cardinality customer-specific tags (namespace, node name, workload name) are intentionally excluded.

Metrics added:

• Admission Webhooks: mutation_attempts, library_injection_attempts, library_injection_errors, patcher_errors, rc_provider_configs, rc_provider_configs_invalid
• Autodiscovery: errors, watched_resources
• Cluster Checks: configs_dispatched, configs_dangling, unscheduled_check
• External Metrics: datadog_metrics
• Language Detection: language_detection_patcher.patches
• WorkloadMeta / Tagger: stored_entities (both), pull_errors

Motivation

See engineering brief and CONTP-1260

Describe how you validated your changes

• Verified all metrics are already exposed as Prometheus metrics by the DCA — no new instrumentation added
• Verified aggregate_tags include only bounded, categorical tags with low per-host context counts per 15-minute window
• Tag selection reviewed against COAT cardinality guidelines
• TODO: test on staging?

Additional Notes

[agent-platform-auto-pr]

Files inventory check summary

File checks results against ancestor 93f15781:

Results for datadog-agent_7.79.0~devel.git.220.41fd697.pipeline.104638753-1_amd64.deb:

No change detected

[agent-platform-auto-pr]

Static quality checks

✅ Please find below the results from static quality gates
Comparison made with ancestor 93f1578
📊 Static Quality Gates Dashboard
🔗 SQG Job

Successful checks

Info

	Quality gate	Change	Size (prev → curr → max)
✅	agent_deb_amd64	+4.71 KiB (0.00% increase)	752.580 → 752.585 → 753.380
✅	agent_deb_amd64_fips	+4.71 KiB (0.00% increase)	709.602 → 709.606 → 713.900
✅	agent_heroku_amd64	+8.0 KiB (0.00% increase)	313.301 → 313.309 → 320.580
✅	agent_rpm_amd64	+4.71 KiB (0.00% increase)	752.564 → 752.568 → 753.350
✅	agent_rpm_amd64_fips	+4.71 KiB (0.00% increase)	709.586 → 709.590 → 713.880
✅	agent_rpm_arm64_fips	+4.09 KiB (0.00% increase)	691.026 → 691.030 → 696.840
✅	agent_suse_amd64	+4.71 KiB (0.00% increase)	752.564 → 752.568 → 753.350
✅	agent_suse_amd64_fips	+4.71 KiB (0.00% increase)	709.586 → 709.590 → 713.880
✅	agent_suse_arm64_fips	+4.09 KiB (0.00% increase)	691.026 → 691.030 → 696.840
✅	docker_agent_amd64	+4.72 KiB (0.00% increase)	812.882 → 812.887 → 815.700
✅	docker_agent_jmx_amd64	+4.71 KiB (0.00% increase)	1003.798 → 1003.803 → 1006.580
✅	docker_cluster_agent_amd64	+4.02 KiB (0.00% increase)	203.942 → 203.946 → 206.270
✅	iot_agent_deb_arm64	+4.0 KiB (0.01% increase)	40.324 → 40.328 → 40.920

17 successful checks with minimal change (< 2 KiB)

	Quality gate	Current Size
✅	agent_rpm_arm64	731.003 MiB
✅	agent_suse_arm64	731.003 MiB
✅	docker_agent_arm64	816.092 MiB
✅	docker_agent_jmx_arm64	995.786 MiB
✅	docker_cluster_agent_arm64	218.420 MiB
✅	docker_cws_instrumentation_amd64	7.142 MiB
✅	docker_cws_instrumentation_arm64	6.689 MiB
✅	docker_dogstatsd_amd64	39.238 MiB
✅	docker_dogstatsd_arm64	37.445 MiB
✅	dogstatsd_deb_amd64	29.881 MiB
✅	dogstatsd_deb_arm64	28.034 MiB
✅	dogstatsd_rpm_amd64	29.881 MiB
✅	dogstatsd_suse_amd64	29.881 MiB
✅	iot_agent_deb_amd64	43.278 MiB
✅	iot_agent_deb_armhf	41.076 MiB
✅	iot_agent_rpm_amd64	43.278 MiB
✅	iot_agent_suse_amd64	43.278 MiB

On-wire sizes (compressed)

	Quality gate	Change	Size (prev → curr → max)
✅	agent_deb_amd64	+46.92 KiB (0.03% increase)	174.737 → 174.783 → 178.360
✅	agent_deb_amd64_fips	-81.64 KiB (0.05% reduction)	165.365 → 165.285 → 172.790
✅	agent_heroku_amd64	+2.05 KiB (0.00% increase)	74.999 → 75.001 → 79.970
✅	agent_rpm_amd64	+28.62 KiB (0.02% increase)	177.548 → 177.576 → 181.830
✅	agent_rpm_amd64_fips	-22.34 KiB (0.01% reduction)	167.609 → 167.587 → 173.370
✅	agent_rpm_arm64	-23.12 KiB (0.01% reduction)	159.496 → 159.474 → 163.060
✅	agent_rpm_arm64_fips	+9.56 KiB (0.01% increase)	151.348 → 151.358 → 156.170
✅	agent_suse_amd64	+28.62 KiB (0.02% increase)	177.548 → 177.576 → 181.830
✅	agent_suse_amd64_fips	-22.34 KiB (0.01% reduction)	167.609 → 167.587 → 173.370
✅	agent_suse_arm64	-23.12 KiB (0.01% reduction)	159.496 → 159.474 → 163.060
✅	agent_suse_arm64_fips	+9.56 KiB (0.01% increase)	151.348 → 151.358 → 156.170
✅	docker_agent_amd64	neutral	268.103 MiB → 272.480
✅	docker_agent_arm64	+29.57 KiB (0.01% increase)	255.297 → 255.326 → 261.060
✅	docker_agent_jmx_amd64	+8.2 KiB (0.00% increase)	336.750 → 336.758 → 341.100
✅	docker_agent_jmx_arm64	+29.93 KiB (0.01% increase)	319.928 → 319.957 → 325.620
✅	docker_cluster_agent_amd64	neutral	71.373 MiB → 72.920
✅	docker_cluster_agent_arm64	-16.7 KiB (0.02% reduction)	67.013 → 66.996 → 68.220
✅	docker_cws_instrumentation_amd64	neutral	2.999 MiB → 3.330
✅	docker_cws_instrumentation_arm64	neutral	2.729 MiB → 3.090
✅	docker_dogstatsd_amd64	neutral	15.174 MiB → 15.820
✅	docker_dogstatsd_arm64	neutral	14.494 MiB → 14.830
✅	dogstatsd_deb_amd64	neutral	7.893 MiB → 8.790
✅	dogstatsd_deb_arm64	neutral	6.778 MiB → 7.710
✅	dogstatsd_rpm_amd64	+2.31 KiB (0.03% increase)	7.903 → 7.905 → 8.800
✅	dogstatsd_suse_amd64	+2.31 KiB (0.03% increase)	7.903 → 7.905 → 8.800
✅	iot_agent_deb_amd64	neutral	11.397 MiB → 12.040
✅	iot_agent_deb_arm64	neutral	9.703 MiB → 10.450
✅	iot_agent_deb_armhf	neutral	9.940 MiB → 10.620
✅	iot_agent_rpm_amd64	-3.52 KiB (0.03% reduction)	11.419 → 11.416 → 12.060
✅	iot_agent_suse_amd64	-3.52 KiB (0.03% reduction)	11.419 → 11.416 → 12.060

[cit-pr-commenter-54b7da]

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Run ID: ce75965a-1553-4120-ba66-2b51f76c0bb6

Baseline: 93f1578
Comparison: 41fd697
Diff

Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected

Experiments ignored for regressions

Regressions in experiments with settings containing erratic: true are ignored.

perf	experiment	goal	Δ mean %	Δ mean % CI	trials	links
➖	docker_containers_cpu	% cpu utilization	-1.39	[-4.34, +1.57]	1	Logs

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf	experiment	goal	Δ mean %	Δ mean % CI	trials	links
➖	docker_containers_memory	memory utilization	+0.44	[+0.37, +0.52]	1	Logs
➖	uds_dogstatsd_20mb_12k_contexts_20_senders	memory utilization	+0.44	[+0.38, +0.50]	1	Logs
➖	otlp_ingest_metrics	memory utilization	+0.16	[+0.00, +0.32]	1	Logs
➖	file_tree	memory utilization	+0.16	[+0.10, +0.21]	1	Logs
➖	ddot_metrics_sum_cumulativetodelta_exporter	memory utilization	+0.08	[-0.14, +0.31]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency	egress throughput	+0.05	[-0.34, +0.44]	1	Logs
➖	quality_gate_metrics_logs	memory utilization	+0.03	[-0.21, +0.27]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖	uds_dogstatsd_to_api	ingress throughput	+0.02	[-0.19, +0.23]	1	Logs
➖	uds_dogstatsd_to_api_v3	ingress throughput	+0.01	[-0.20, +0.21]	1	Logs
➖	tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude	ingress throughput	-0.00	[-0.11, +0.11]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency	egress throughput	-0.02	[-0.52, +0.47]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency	egress throughput	-0.02	[-0.46, +0.41]	1	Logs
➖	ddot_metrics_sum_cumulative	memory utilization	-0.05	[-0.19, +0.09]	1	Logs
➖	ddot_metrics_sum_delta	memory utilization	-0.05	[-0.21, +0.11]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency	egress throughput	-0.08	[-0.17, +0.00]	1	Logs
➖	quality_gate_idle	memory utilization	-0.11	[-0.16, -0.06]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖	quality_gate_idle_all_features	memory utilization	-0.43	[-0.47, -0.39]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖	tcp_syslog_to_blackhole	ingress throughput	-0.47	[-0.60, -0.33]	1	Logs
➖	otlp_ingest_logs	memory utilization	-0.61	[-0.70, -0.51]	1	Logs
➖	ddot_metrics	memory utilization	-0.62	[-0.79, -0.45]	1	Logs
➖	quality_gate_logs	% cpu utilization	-0.68	[-2.27, +0.92]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖	ddot_logs	memory utilization	-1.10	[-1.18, -1.03]	1	Logs
➖	docker_containers_cpu	% cpu utilization	-1.39	[-4.34, +1.57]	1	Logs

Bounds Checks: ❌ Failed

perf	experiment	bounds_check_name	replicates_passed	observed_value	links
✅	docker_containers_cpu	simple_check_run	10/10	693 ≥ 26
✅	docker_containers_memory	memory_usage	10/10	276.83MiB ≤ 370MiB
✅	docker_containers_memory	simple_check_run	10/10	705 ≥ 26
✅	file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency	memory_usage	10/10	0.19GiB ≤ 1.20GiB
✅	file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency	missed_bytes	10/10	0B = 0B
✅	file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency	memory_usage	10/10	0.24GiB ≤ 1.20GiB
✅	file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency	missed_bytes	10/10	0B = 0B
✅	file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency	memory_usage	10/10	0.20GiB ≤ 1.20GiB
✅	file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency	missed_bytes	10/10	0B = 0B
✅	file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency	memory_usage	10/10	0.22GiB ≤ 1.20GiB
✅	file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency	missed_bytes	10/10	0B = 0B
✅	quality_gate_idle	intake_connections	10/10	3 = 3	bounds checks dashboard
❌	quality_gate_idle	memory_usage	9/10	175.39MiB > 175MiB	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_idle_all_features	intake_connections	10/10	3 = 3	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_idle_all_features	memory_usage	10/10	496.97MiB ≤ 550MiB	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_logs	intake_connections	10/10	4 ≤ 6	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_logs	memory_usage	10/10	204.49MiB ≤ 220MiB	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_logs	missed_bytes	10/10	0B = 0B	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_metrics_logs	cpu_usage	10/10	351.08 ≤ 2000	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_metrics_logs	intake_connections	10/10	4 ≤ 6	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_metrics_logs	memory_usage	10/10	422.55MiB ≤ 475MiB	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_metrics_logs	missed_bytes	10/10	0B = 0B	bounds checks dashboard

Explanation

Confidence level: 90.00%
Effect size tolerance: |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%

Performance changes are noted in the perf column of each table:

• ✅ = significantly better comparison variant performance
• ❌ = significantly worse comparison variant performance
• ➖ = no significant change in performance

A regression test is an A/B test of target performance in a repeatable rig, where "performance" is measured as "comparison variant minus baseline variant" for an optimization goal (e.g., ingress throughput). Due to intrinsic variability in measuring that goal, we can only estimate its mean value for each experiment; we report uncertainty in that value as a 90.00% confidence interval denoted "Δ mean % CI".

For each experiment, we decide whether a change in performance is a "regression" -- a change worth investigating further -- if all of the following criteria are true:

1. Its estimated |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%, indicating the change is big enough to merit a closer look.

2. Its 90.00% confidence interval "Δ mean % CI" does not contain zero, indicating that if our statistical model is accurate, there is at least a 90.00% chance there is a difference in performance between baseline and comparison variants.

3. Its configuration does not mark it "erratic".

CI Pass/Fail Decision

❌ Failed. Some Quality Gates were violated.

• quality_gate_logs, bounds check missed_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_logs, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 9/10 replicas passed. Failed 1 which is > 0. Gate FAILED.
• quality_gate_idle, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check cpu_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check missed_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 522078e632

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".