Ezra is Scrubbe’s AI reasoning engine. When you point it at an incident, it runs a four-stage pipeline — ingesting signals, forming hypotheses, mapping impact, and generating remediation options — then surfaces its findings as a structured analysis. From that analysis, you can produce a written report for either an engineering audience or a leadership audience, and feed the eventual outcome back so Ezra learns from each event. This guide walks through the full Ezra workflow: analysing an incident, reading the output, generating reports, and closing the learning loop.Documentation Index
Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://docs.scrubbe.com/llms.txt
Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.
Prerequisites
- A valid API key with Ezra access enabled
- An incident ticket with sufficient detail —
techDescription,impactSummary, andblastRadiusall improve Ezra’s output (see Manage Incidents)
Trigger an analysis
Submit an incident to Ezra for analysis. This initiates the four-stage reasoning pipeline. The call is asynchronous — Ezra processes the incident and stores the result for retrieval.incidentId as a reference key.
Retrieve the analysis
Once Ezra has completed the pipeline, fetch the full analysis by incident ID. The output includes hypotheses, impact assessment, and ranked remediation options.List all analyses
Review all Ezra analyses across your workspace — useful for retrospectives and identifying recurring patterns.Generate a report
Turn an Ezra analysis into a written report tailored to your audience. ChooseENGINEER for a technical deep-dive or LEADERSHIP for an executive-level summary.
- Engineer report
- Leadership report
The engineer report includes technical hypotheses, root cause reasoning, system-level impact, and specific remediation steps.
The
analysisId comes from the analysis response, not the incidentId. Retrieve the analysis first to get the correct ID.Submit an outcome
After the incident is resolved, tell Ezra what actually happened. This feedback feeds back into Ezra’s reasoning model, improving the quality of future analyses for similar incidents.| Outcome value | When to use |
|---|---|
RESOLVED | The incident was fully mitigated and systems returned to normal |
MITIGATED | Impact was reduced but the underlying issue persists |
DEGRADED | Ezra’s remediations partially helped but the situation worsened |
WORSENED | Actions taken made the incident worse |
NEUTRAL | The outcome was unrelated to Ezra’s suggestions |
View learned patterns
Ezra identifies recurring patterns across incidents — similar failure modes, common root causes, and high-frequency service interactions. Use these patterns to prioritise reliability investments.Recommended Ezra workflow
Create the incident
Open a ticket via
POST /api/v1/incident-ticket with as much technical context as available.Read the analysis
Poll
GET /api/v1/ezra/analysis/:incidentId until complete, then review Ezra’s hypotheses and remediation options with your team.Generate reports
Produce an
ENGINEER report for the response team and a LEADERSHIP report for stakeholders via POST /api/v1/ezra/report.