How we investigate
Our process is the same whether you hire us for a sprint or a post-incident review: collect facts, form falsifiable hypotheses, and stop when a single explanation fits the evidence without hand-waving.
-
Intake briefing
You walk us through user-visible symptoms, business impact, deploy history, and prior theories. We agree what “solved” means—usually a reproduced failure with a named code path and triggering inputs.
-
Evidence inventory
We list available artefacts: logs, traces, feature flags, support tickets, and staging parity. Missing data becomes an explicit risk on the statement of work.
-
Hypothesis board
Each theory gets a test that could disprove it. We share the board in your ticket system so your team sees dead ends as progress, not wasted time.
-
Instrumented reproduction
We prefer staging or shadow traffic. When production observation is required, changes are minimal, logged, and time-limited. Pairing with your engineer is mandatory for unfamiliar subsystems.
-
Root-cause confirmation
We demonstrate the failure with a controlled input or load pattern, then show how the proposed fix removes the symptom without hiding unrelated errors.
-
Handover documentation
Written report, diagrams, and optional live walkthrough. You decide whether the document is internal-only or shareable with auditors.
Ready to open an investigation?
Share a short description of the failure and we will respond within two business days with availability and whether a sprint, lab, or review fits best.