Use cases
Once your assistant is connected, these are the things worth asking it for. Paste any prompt as written — your assistant works out which tools and skills it needs, and asks you for anything it’s missing.
Start with Instrument this project. It exercises the whole loop — write code, run it, read the trace back — so if it works, everything is wired up correctly.
Jump to: Set up tracing · Debug a trace · Find your data · Review a project · Analyse experiments · Build evaluations · Review and score
Set up tracing
Your assistant detects the language and framework, adds the decorators or integration, wires up config, then runs the app and reads the trace back to prove it landed.
Debug a specific trace
Your assistant reads the full span tree, the tool calls, the errors and the feedback scores, so you never paste a screenshot into chat. Give it a trace URL from the Opik UI, or let it find the trace itself.
Find the data you care about
Your assistant can search and filter your traces, spans and threads by content, status, duration, token usage, feedback score or time window — so it answers these in one pass instead of you clicking through the UI.
Review a project
Ask for a read on a whole project rather than one trace — useful on a Monday morning, before a release, or on a codebase you didn’t write.
If you have Diagnostics enabled, your assistant can also work its issue queue directly — “show me the open Diagnostics issues and fix the one hitting the most traces”. If it isn’t enabled, ask your assistant to turn it on for a project and run the first scan. Everything else on this page works without it.
Analyse experiment results
If you already run evaluations, your assistant can read the results and act on them, rather than you reading a table and relaying what it says.
Build an evaluation pipeline
Real traces make better test cases than invented ones, because they are inputs your app actually received.
Review and score
What a session looks like
A typical investigative loop, using Claude Code:
You: Why did the experiment “gpt-4o-rerank-v3” regress on factuality?
Claude: (reads the failing traces) Three traces failed because the reranker dropped the system message. The remaining 12 traces scored above 0.8…
You: Score the bottom 3 traces 0.2 with reason “dropped system message”.
Claude: (writes the scores) Done — three scores recorded on traces
<id-1>,<id-2>,<id-3>.
From then on your assistant can check its own work against real traces every time you change something.