APPSEC-69232 Report DD_APPSEC_AGENTIC_ONBOARDING in config telemetry

[christophe-papazian]

APPSEC-69232

Implements [RFC-1113] — Agentic Onboarding Runtime Detection (Simplified) for
the PHP tracer.

The agentic onboarding solution sets DD_APPSEC_AGENTIC_ONBOARDING=true when it
writes the deployment configuration. This PR registers it as an ordinary
string configuration key (default empty), so its raw value is reported
verbatim in configuration telemetry — with no derived boolean and no code that
reads AppSec's runtime state. Whether AppSec actually started is answered
downstream in Metabase.

Changes

• ext/configuration.h: add CONFIG(STRING, DD_APPSEC_AGENTIC_ONBOARDING, "").
  The existing telemetry loop (ext/telemetry.c) already reports every
  registered config entry, so the value is emitted on every app-started —
  empty with origin=default when unset, and verbatim with origin=env_var
  (or local/fleet stable config) when set.
• metadata/supported-configurations.json: declare the key (implementation
  A, type string, default "").
• Tests (tests/ext/appsec/agentic_onboarding_is_sent_0{1,2}.phpt): assert the
  config is reported with the default empty value + origin=default when unset,
  and verbatim (true) with origin=env_var when set.

Sibling PRs

• dd-trace-go feat(appsec): report agentic onboarding marker in configuration telemetry (RFC-1113) dd-trace-go#5055
• dd-trace-java Report agentic onboarding marker in configuration telemetry (RFC-1113) dd-trace-java#11983
• dd-trace-dotnet [AppSec] Report agentic onboarding marker in configuration telemetry (RFC-1113) dd-trace-dotnet#8920
• dd-trace-rb Report agentic onboarding marker in configuration telemetry (RFC-1113) dd-trace-rb#6079

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[datadog-datadog-us1-prod]

 

✨ Unblock PR with BitsAI

⚠️ Warnings

🚦 4 Pipeline jobs failed

DataDog/apm-reliability/dd-trace-php | test_web_drupal_95: [7.4, cgi-fcgi]     

DataDog/apm-reliability/dd-trace-php | test_web_drupal_95: [7.4, cli-server]     

DataDog/apm-reliability/dd-trace-php | installer tests     

View all 4 failed jobs.

ℹ️ Info

No other issues found (see more)

🧪 All tests passed
❄️ No new flaky tests detected

🔄 Datadog auto-retried 8 jobs - 8 passed on retry

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
• Patch Coverage: 100.00%
• Overall Coverage: 54.11% (+0.03%)

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎

_{This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 503d055 | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Give us feedback!}

[pr-commenter]

Benchmarks [ tracer ]

Benchmark execution time: 2026-07-22 14:42:57

Comparing candidate commit 503d055 in PR branch christophe-papazian/appsec-agentic-onboarding with baseline commit 2db5578 in branch master.

Found 1 performance improvements and 3 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 189 metrics, 1 unstable metrics.

Explanation

This is an A/B test comparing a candidate commit's performance against that of a baseline commit. Performance changes are noted in the tables below as:

• 🟩 = significantly better candidate vs. baseline
• 🟥 = significantly worse candidate vs. baseline

We compute a confidence interval (CI) over the relative difference of means between metrics from the candidate and baseline commits, considering the baseline as the reference.

If the CI is entirely outside the configured SIGNIFICANT_IMPACT_THRESHOLD (or the deprecated UNCONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD), the change is considered significant.

Feel free to reach out to #apm-benchmarking-platform on Slack if you have any questions.

More details about the CI and significant changes

You can imagine this CI as a range of values that is likely to contain the true difference of means between the candidate and baseline commits.

CIs of the difference of means are often centered around 0%, because often changes are not that big:

---------------------------------(------|---^--------)-------------------------------->
                              -0.6%    0%  0.3%     +1.2%
                                 |          |        |
         lower bound of the CI --'          |        |
sample mean (center of the CI) -------------'        |
         upper bound of the CI ----------------------'

As described above, a change is considered significant if the CI is entirely outside the configured SIGNIFICANT_IMPACT_THRESHOLD (or the deprecated UNCONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD).

For instance, for an execution time metric, this confidence interval indicates a significantly worse performance:

----------------------------------------|---------|---(---------^---------)---------->
                                       0%        1%  1.3%      2.2%      3.1%
                                                  |   |         |         |
       significant impact threshold --------------'   |         |         |
                      lower bound of CI --------------'         |         |
       sample mean (center of the CI) --------------------------'         |
                      upper bound of CI ----------------------------------'

scenario:MessagePackSerializationBench/benchMessagePackSerialization

• 🟩 execution_time [-5.187µs; -2.653µs] or [-4.843%; -2.477%]

scenario:PDOBench/benchPDOOverhead

• 🟥 execution_time [+6.108µs; +9.362µs] or [+2.358%; +3.614%]

scenario:PDOBench/benchPDOOverheadWithDBM

• 🟥 execution_time [+8.675µs; +11.507µs] or [+3.359%; +4.456%]

scenario:PHPRedisBench/benchRedisOverhead

• 🟥 execution_time [+38.370µs; +57.802µs] or [+3.756%; +5.658%]