You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Is your feature request related to a problem?
The current Guardrails DB lacks sufficient data points for effective RCA/debugging and performance tracking, which hinders our ability to analyze and improve system performance.
Describe the solution you'd like
Add more data points to the Guardrails DB, including:
Triggered validator config for each request
LLM critic response (e.g., score)
Provider response ID
Usage/stats data (cost, latency, tokens) for each request
Original issue
Need more data stored in the Guardrails DB (at request log table or validator log table) that can help us with RCA/Debugging and for tracking performance metrics.
Which validaor config was triggered against request
LLM critic response e.g Score
provider response id
More info that can help us to know cost, latency, tokens against a request (usage/stats data)
Also as part of PII , if presidio returns the score , then requesting to store score also. I think you can store all such validator specific data in metadata column in json etc format. We can consume it from there. All these scores will be imp for debugging and also knowing the analytics around where most queries are falling (direct outlier or on boundry etc)
Activity
[-]Additional data points needed in the DB[/-][+]Guardrails DB: Enhance data points[/+]pritam-T4D commentedon May 25, 2026
@rkritika1508 @dennyabrain FYI
PritamSGB commentedon May 29, 2026
Also as part of PII , if presidio returns the score , then requesting to store score also. I think you can store all such validator specific data in metadata column in json etc format. We can consume it from there. All these scores will be imp for debugging and also knowing the analytics around where most queries are falling (direct outlier or on boundry etc)