chore(tests): run dynamic instrumentation with uv

[mabdinur]

Description

Declare the existing dynamic-instrumentation test environment in tests/debugging/suitespec.yml and add it to UV_TEST_SUITES. This switches the debugger CI job from Riot to uv without changing its command, dependencies, Python coverage, or lock files.

The primary regression gate is test_uv_suitespec_matches_riot. It compares every migrated environment with Riot, including commands, direct dependencies, environment variables, and lock hashes. Reviewers do not need to manually audit each expanded suite variant.

Testing

• Ran test_uv_suitespec_matches_riot locally
• Ran test_registry_contains through the Python 3.13 debugger uv environment
• Ran scripts/lint suitespec-check
• Ran targeted formatting and style checks

Risks

Low. The test definition is unchanged; only the environment runner changes. CI remains the source of truth for the full debugger suite.

Additional Notes

• Stacked on chore(tests): declare contrib environments in suitespec #20012
• Full migration context: ci: replace Riot test environments with uv #19713
• No lock files or Riot definitions are changed

[cit-pr-commenter-54b7da]

Codeowners resolved as

Resolved from the full PR diff against codex/declare-all-suitespec using the target branch CODEOWNERS file.
CODEOWNERS team requests not listed below are not required by the current file set.

tests/debugging/suitespec.yml                                           @DataDog/debugger-python
tests/suitespec.py                                                      @DataDog/python-guild @DataDog/apm-core-python

[cit-pr-commenter-54b7da]

Circular import analysis

⚠️ Existing circular imports

There are 3 circular imports that already exist on the base branch and have not been changed by this PR.

ddtrace.llmobs -> ddtrace.llmobs._evaluators -> ddtrace.llmobs._evaluators.format -> ddtrace.llmobs._experiment -> ddtrace.llmobs
ddtrace.errortracking._handled_exceptions.bytecode_injector -> ddtrace.errortracking._handled_exceptions.callbacks -> ddtrace.errortracking._handled_exceptions.collector -> ddtrace.errortracking._handled_exceptions.bytecode_reporting -> ddtrace.errortracking._handled_exceptions.bytecode_injector
ddtrace.appsec._asm_request_context -> ddtrace.appsec._iast._iast_request_context_base -> ddtrace.appsec._iast._iast_env -> ddtrace.appsec._iast.reporter -> ddtrace.appsec._exploit_prevention.stack_traces -> ddtrace.appsec._asm_request_context

[cit-pr-commenter-54b7da]

Dependency direction analysis

⚠️ Existing dependency direction violations

There are 230 dependency direction violations that already exist on the base branch and have not been changed by this PR.

Show existing violations (showing 5 of 230 highest severity)

ddtrace.internal.tracemethods -×-> ddtrace.trace  (internal-core -> product:tracing, score=134)
ddtrace.debugging._signal.model -×-> ddtrace.trace  (product:debugging -> product:tracing, score=132)
ddtrace.llmobs._integrations.vertexai -×-> ddtrace.trace  (product:llmobs -> product:tracing, score=132)
ddtrace.llmobs._utils -×-> ddtrace.trace  (product:llmobs -> product:tracing, score=132)
ddtrace.internal.test_visibility.api -×-> ddtrace.trace  (product:ci_visibility -> product:tracing, score=132)

To see all violations, download the layers-base.json and layers-pr.json artifacts from this CI job and run:

uv run --script scripts/import-analysis/layers.py compare layers-base.json layers-pr.json

[pr-commenter]

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2026-09-03 21:18:59

Comparing candidate commit e8da39a in PR branch codex/declare-debugging-suitespec with baseline commit 6a7d079 in branch main.

📊 Benchmarking dashboard

Found 0 performance improvements and 4 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 581 metrics, 10 unstable metrics, 3 known flaky benchmarks, 15 flaky benchmarks without significant changes.

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:httppropagationinject-ids_only

• 🟥 execution_time [+2.838µs; +2.971µs] or [+16.862%; +17.651%]

scenario:iastaspectsospath-ospathbasename_aspect

• 🟥 execution_time [+106.325µs; +114.565µs] or [+25.142%; +27.091%]

scenario:telemetryaddmetric-1-count-metric-1-times

• 🟥 execution_time [+632.837ns; +660.551ns] or [+23.479%; +24.507%]

scenario:tracer-small

• 🟥 execution_time [+37.690µs; +40.246µs] or [+11.529%; +12.311%]

Unstable benchmarks

These benchmarks have a confidence interval too wide to call a change; treat them as noise rather than signal.

scenario:coreapiscenario-context_with_data_listeners

• unstable execution_time [-738.925ns; +767.529ns] or [-6.570%; +6.824%]

scenario:coreapiscenario-core_dispatch_1_listener

• unstable execution_time [-37.993ns; +28.993ns] or [-6.170%; +4.708%]

scenario:coreapiscenario-core_dispatch_50_listeners

• unstable execution_time [-1634.738ns; +1736.584ns] or [-9.428%; +10.016%]

scenario:coreapiscenario-core_dispatch_exception_listeners

• unstable execution_time [-1340.649ns; +1202.325ns] or [-10.023%; +8.989%]

scenario:coreapiscenario-core_dispatch_listeners

• unstable execution_time [-351.352ns; +322.074ns] or [-9.373%; +8.592%]

scenario:coreapiscenario-core_dispatch_no_args_listeners

• unstable execution_time [-258.503ns; +264.595ns] or [-8.679%; +8.884%]

scenario:coreapiscenario-core_dispatch_with_results_1_listener

• unstable execution_time [-64.455ns; +83.742ns] or [-5.695%; +7.399%]

scenario:coreapiscenario-core_dispatch_with_results_50_listeners

• unstable execution_time [-4067.566ns; +3999.399ns] or [-9.918%; +9.752%]

scenario:coreapiscenario-core_dispatch_with_results_listeners

• unstable execution_time [-770.966ns; +774.314ns] or [-9.542%; +9.584%]

scenario:packagesupdateimporteddependencies-import_many_stdlib_cached

• unstable execution_time [-57.885µs; +51.903µs] or [-10.030%; +8.993%]

Known flaky benchmarks

These benchmarks are marked as flaky and will not trigger a failure. Modify FLAKY_BENCHMARKS_REGEX to control which benchmarks are marked as flaky.

scenario:iastaspects-casefold_noaspect

• 🟥 execution_time [+32.330µs; +41.383µs] or [+12.517%; +16.022%]

scenario:iastaspects-swapcase_aspect

• 🟥 execution_time [+46.193µs; +56.455µs] or [+16.648%; +20.345%]

scenario:span-start

• 🟥 execution_time [+1.640ms; +1.823ms] or [+11.410%; +12.687%]

Known flaky benchmarks without significant changes:

• scenario:errortrackingflasksqli-baseline
• scenario:flasksimple-iast-get
• scenario:iastaspects-casefold_aspect
• scenario:iastaspects-index_aspect
• scenario:iastaspects-ljust_noaspect
• scenario:iastaspects-lower_aspect
• scenario:iastaspects-replace_aspect
• scenario:iastaspects-title_noaspect
• scenario:iastaspects-translate_aspect
• scenario:iastaspects-translate_noaspect
• scenario:iastaspects-upper_noaspect
• scenario:packagespackageforrootmodulemapping-cache_off
• scenario:packagespackageforrootmodulemapping-cache_on
• scenario:sethttpmeta-all-enabled
• scenario:telemetryaddmetric-record-100-metrics

[datadog-prod-us1-6]

🎉 All green!

🧪 All tests passed
❄️ No new flaky tests detected

🔄 Datadog retried 15 tests - 15 passed on retry

🚧 9 tests that failed were ignored due to quarantine

_{This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: e8da39a | Docs | View more details | Give us feedback!}