🔍 Agentic Workflow Audit Report - 2025-11-23 #4578
Closed
Replies: 1 comment
-
|
This discussion was automatically closed because it was created by an agentic workflow more than 1 week ago. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
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.
-
🔍 Agentic Workflow Audit Report - 2025-11-23
This audit covers workflow runs from the last 24 hours, analyzing 94 agentic workflow executions for health, performance, errors, and missing tools.
Executive Summary
Over the past 24 hours, the agentic workflow system demonstrated strong overall health with an 88.3% success rate. The system processed 33.1M tokens with an estimated cost of $23.38. While most workflows executed successfully, several areas require attention, including missing tool requests (primarily Playwright in Copilot context) and a few failing workflows.
Key Highlights:
📈 Workflow Health Trends
Success/Failure Patterns
The trend chart shows consistent workflow execution over the past 4 days with generally high success rates. The most recent day (Nov 22) shows the highest activity with 40+ successful runs and a success rate above 90%. The pattern indicates healthy, stable operations with occasional failures that are being appropriately handled.
Token Usage & Costs
Token consumption shows significant variation by day, with Nov 21 seeing the highest usage (10M+ tokens, $5+ estimated cost). The 7-day moving averages smooth out the volatility, revealing a general upward trend in resource utilization. This suggests increasing workflow complexity or frequency, warranting monitoring for cost optimization opportunities.
Full Audit Report
Audit Methodology
Period: Last 24 hours (November 22-23, 2025)
Runs Analyzed: 94 workflow executions
Data Sources: GitHub Actions workflow run logs, MCP server logs, agent stdio logs
Tools Used: gh-aw MCP server, Python analysis scripts, pandas, matplotlib, seaborn
Missing Tools Analysis
Missing tool requests indicate functionality that agents attempted to use but was unavailable in their execution environment.
Summary
Detailed Analysis
Playwright MCP Tool (7 requests)
Python Scientific Libraries (1 request)
/tmp/gh-aw/python/directory structure.Package Manager & GitHub CLI (3 requests)
MCP Server Failures
✅ No MCP server failures detected during the audit period. All configured MCP servers (GitHub, Playwright, gh-aw, safeoutputs) functioned correctly.
Error Analysis
Failed Workflows
5 workflows failed during the audit period:
1. Copilot PR Conversation NLP Analysis
2. Glossary Maintainer
3. Changeset Generator (2 failures)
4. Tidy
Error Patterns
Most "errors" in the logs are actually JSON-formatted log entries from the agent stdio logs and do not represent actual failures. The log collection system captures these as errors due to their format. True errors need manual investigation of the specific workflow run logs.
Performance Metrics
Token Usage Statistics
Top Token Consumers
Workflow Success Rates
Most workflows maintained high success rates. Notable statistics:
Duration Analysis
Job durations were reasonable across all workflows, with most completing within expected timeframes. No timeout issues detected.
Workflow Statistics by Type
By Engine
Based on available data:
High-Frequency Workflows
These workflows ran most frequently in the past 24 hours:
Recommendations
Priority 1: Critical
Investigate Changeset Generator Failures
Address Copilot PR NLP Analysis High Error Rate
Priority 2: High
Resolve Missing Tool Issues
Optimize High Token Consumers
Priority 3: Medium
Monitor Token Usage Trends
Improve Error Logging
Priority 4: Low
Historical Context
This is the first comprehensive audit using the new gh-aw MCP server infrastructure. Historical data is being collected for trend analysis:
/tmp/gh-aw/cache-memory/audits/2025-11-23.json/tmp/gh-aw/cache-memory/patterns/Affected Workflows Summary
Workflows with Issues:
High-Performing Workflows:
Next Steps
Conclusion
The agentic workflow system is operating with good overall health (88.3% success rate) but has specific areas requiring attention. The missing tools issues are addressable through configuration or workflow updates. Failed workflows need individual investigation. Token consumption is within reasonable bounds but trending upward, suggesting a need for ongoing monitoring and optimization.
The new audit infrastructure with trend visualization provides excellent visibility into system health. Continued daily audits will build historical context and enable predictive maintenance.
References:
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions