> If you don’t know how it broke, and you don’t know how you fixed it, what exactly is it you think you understand about your application?

what we wanted to convey is that sometimes people confuse "the symptom went away" with "the root cause was fixed"

I have seen that a rollback, a quick redeploy, or a temporary drop in tenant load makes the alerts go away and issue is considered resolved. specially true for larger teams with many engineers and services

a real example: a dev got OOMed after a release that coincided with a flash sale. he increased memory limits, and containers stopped crashing and it was "fixed". Actualy, a newly introduced internal module had a memory leak. adding RAM just hid the leak until the next traffic spike.

hyperprobe exists to capture actual in-memory runtime state during live traffic so you can prove the root cause before changing code or scaling infra in this case

Agents wrote the code, agents tested the code, agents reviewed the diff, a human reviewed the diff, agents verified it made it to production correctly.

But when the pipeline fails (bugs happen that's fine) re-running the exact same process may not be the solution.

Where does the additional intelligence that wasn't there before come from? We ran the pipeline that got it to prod on the same exact models you have access to. So the value prop is that you read the logs automatically instead of a developer directing a debug session?