Improve templates for GitHub issues

[xlamorlette-datadog]

Clean and standardize the options and templates for creating issues on GitHub, across the C++ Tracer and Proxy Integrations repositories.

Jira ticket: IDMPL-1011 [C++ Tracer] [Nginx] [Apache] [Kong] Clean and standardize GitHub issue creation

[pr-commenter]

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2026-10-01 13:49:31

Comparing candidate commit 84fb898 in PR branch xlamorlette/amend-github-issue-instructions with baseline commit 7059aed in branch main.

Found 0 performance improvements and 2 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 6 metrics, 0 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:BM_TraceID_HexPadded/NoPadding

• 🟥 execution_time [+16.386µs; +26.896µs] or [+8.349%; +13.703%]

scenario:BM_TraceID_HexPadded/WithPadding

• 🟥 execution_time [+7.697µs; +15.133µs] or [+5.702%; +11.211%]

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-09-29T15:17:33.877529Z	3338ca5	Draft marked ready
🔒 Security Review	✅ Completed 2026-09-29T15:18:46.071492Z	3338ca5	Draft marked ready

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[datadog-prod-us1-3]

✨ Unblock PR with BitsAI

❌ Errors

Your PR has failed checks. Please review the issues below and take necessary action before merging.

🚦 2 Pipeline jobs failed

DataDog/apm-reliability/dd-trace-cpp | check-big-regressions — 🔧 Needs a code fix, caused by this PR

View more details · View in GitLab

Development | build-windows-cmake (arm64)

View more details · View in GitHub Actions

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎

_{This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 84fb898 | Docs | View more details | Give us feedback!}

[pawelchcki]

You should probably also add AGENTS.md to make sure these rules are respected by commiters. Just a line saying that PRs should follow the format would suffice

[xlamorlette-datadog]

You should probably also add AGENTS.md to make sure these rules are respected by commiters. Just a line saying that PRs should follow the format would suffice

@pawelchcki This PR is about what users see when opening an issue in GitHub, not about PRs. I plan to also improve the PR template, and, more important, to state precisely what is expected in a PR before submitting it. This should come quite soon, stay tuned ;-)