Database Investigations in Bits Chat: GA, reframe, AI Credits

[ethanperez]

What does this PR do? What is the motivation?

Database Investigator is out of Preview and now runs inside Bits Chat. This reframes /database_monitoring/database_investigator/ accordingly:

• Removes the Preview callout.
• Retitles to "Database Investigations in Bits Chat" and updates the nav label. The URL is unchanged, so no redirect is needed.
• Makes Bits Chat the actor throughout — Database Monitoring contributes the tools and skills, Bits Chat runs the investigation. "Database Investigator" is dropped as a product name except where it refers to the retired Preview harness.
• Notes that database investigations are billed in AI Credits, replacing the "included with Database Monitoring, 100 investigations per month" language.
• Clicking Investigate now auto-launches a Bits Chat session, so there is no suggested prompt to run. Adds the Ask Bits / Cmd+I entry point.
• Adds a "Preview investigations" section covering how to view, share, and export Preview-era investigations, available until September 30, 2026.
• Drops the "Conversation history" section and the zero-retention callout — both belong to Bits Chat, not Database Monitoring.
• Carries over the editorial pass from [DBM] Database Investigator: MySQL and Oracle Database in early access #37450 (FAQ worked into the body, including a "Programmatic access" section for the MCP server). That PR is superseded by this one and can be closed.
• Replaces all five screenshots with Bits Chat equivalents.

Follows the Cloud Cost Skill in Bits Chat page as a model.

Merge readiness

• Ready for merge

For Datadog employees:

• ⚠️ Your branch name MUST follow the `/` convention and include the forward slash (`/`).
• 🤖 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, reviewed and directed by me.

[datadog-prod-us1-6]

More details

The changed page remains internally consistent: the new Bits Chat and AI Credits references resolve, the replacement screenshots exist, and the menu/front matter parse successfully. Full Hugo rendering could not run because the sandbox could not download the repository's existing websites-modules dependency; no behavioral regression was reproducible with the available local checks.

Was this helpful? React 👍 or 👎

_{📊 Validated against 6 scenarios · Open Bits AI session}

_{🤖 Datadog Autotest · Commit 933df12 · What is Autotest? · @DataDog review to ask questions · Any feedback? Reach out in #autotest}

[github-actions]

Preview links (active after the build_preview check completes)

Modified Files

• https://docs-staging.datadoghq.com/ethan.perez/dbm-database-investigator-ga-bits-chat/database_monitoring/database_investigator/

[joepeeples]

Opened DOCS-15241 to assign a Docs writer and follow up with editorial review.

[OliviaShoup]

Thanks for the PR! It looks great. Just so you know, I cropped the screenshots to remove the side nav and search bar so they're more evergreen. Nothing you have to do. I just did that to save you some time since this is a more urgent request.

One higher-level item worth a look before merge:

Three facts from the old FAQ don't appear to have landed anywhere in the new body, and I couldn't find them documented elsewhere in the repo:

• Which databases are supported (old page: "Postgres and SQL Server are supported in Preview for all Database Monitoring customers"). If GA still doesn't cover every DBM database engine, readers need to know; if it now covers all of them, that's worth stating explicitly.
• The zero-retention/zero-training disclosure for the third-party AI providers powering investigations. I checked content/en/bits_ai/bits_chat.md and didn't find this stated anywhere else — this reads like a trust/compliance-relevant claim that was dropped rather than deliberately removed.
• The 100 investigations/month usage cap. May no longer apply now that this is billed via AI Credits, but as written it's ambiguous by omission rather than stated as changed.

Could you confirm whether these were intentionally cut (and if so, mind adding a sentence covering the current state), or should they be restored?

Minor inline suggestions below, none blocking.

[ethanperez]

Thanks for the PR! It looks great. Just so you know, I cropped the screenshots to remove the side nav and search bar so they're more evergreen. Nothing you have to do. I just did that to save you some time since this is a more urgent request.

One higher-level item worth a look before merge:

Three facts from the old FAQ don't appear to have landed anywhere in the new body, and I couldn't find them documented elsewhere in the repo:

• Which databases are supported (old page: "Postgres and SQL Server are supported in Preview for all Database Monitoring customers"). If GA still doesn't cover every DBM database engine, readers need to know; if it now covers all of them, that's worth stating explicitly.
• The zero-retention/zero-training disclosure for the third-party AI providers powering investigations. I checked content/en/bits_ai/bits_chat.md and didn't find this stated anywhere else — this reads like a trust/compliance-relevant claim that was dropped rather than deliberately removed.
• The 100 investigations/month usage cap. May no longer apply now that this is billed via AI Credits, but as written it's ambiguous by omission rather than stated as changed.

Could you confirm whether these were intentionally cut (and if so, mind adding a sentence covering the current state), or should they be restored?

Minor inline suggestions below, none blocking.

@OliviaShoup thanks for the review and for updating the screenshots!

To answer your questions about the FAQ - yes, all three of these items were meant to be removed!

1. We're supporting investigations and query skills for all of our supported DBMSes, so no need to call out individual DBMSes now.
2. I removed this on purpose because we've moved this AI capability from our team's (DBM) managed agent to Bits Chat, managed by that centralized team. We're not in a place to control / set that policy (even though it's the same for all our products) anymore, so I don't want to duplicate claims or information from centralized AI tools that may change over time.
3. This was also a policy we had that only persisted through Preview and while DBM controlled the AI agent. Now that we've passed that over to Bits Chat and we just launch our investigations within Bits Chat, we have no control over access or limits - that's all handled by AI Credit controls.

Let me know if those make sense or if we should address them in a different way in the doc!

[OliviaShoup]

@ethanperez Thanks, this all makes sense! Agreed on dropping the zero-retention/training language and the usage cap, since those are now owned by the centralized Bits Chat team and could drift out of sync if DBM keeps stating them.

One small ask on the database support point: since it's a good thing that it's now universal, could you add a short line saying so explicitly (something like "supports all databases monitored by Database Monitoring") rather than leaving it unstated? Doesn't need to be a whole section, just enough that a reader isn't left wondering if their specific database is covered.

[ethanperez]

@OliviaShoup just realized that I think one of the github suggestions got wonky here, going to update this and previous paragraph to match your change + make sure the follow up point stays

P1: "Bits Chat streams the response as it works through the investigation. It states a plan, calls Datadog services to gather evidence, and shares interim findings. The investigation ends with a structured report covering what happened, why, the supporting evidence, the root cause, and recommended fixes."

P2: "You can ask follow-up questions at any point to refine the analysis. You can also paste in external context, such as an execution plan captured outside of Datadog, and Bits Chat factors it into its next steps."

[ethanperez]

@ethanperez Thanks, this all makes sense! Agreed on dropping the zero-retention/training language and the usage cap, since those are now owned by the centralized Bits Chat team and could drift out of sync if DBM keeps stating them.

One small ask on the database support point: since it's a good thing that it's now universal, could you add a short line saying so explicitly (something like "supports all databases monitored by Database Monitoring") rather than leaving it unstated? Doesn't need to be a whole section, just enough that a reader isn't left wondering if their specific database is covered.

@OliviaShoup updated!

[OliviaShoup]

thank you @ethanperez !