Guida
LLM observability tools for regulated teams
A regulated buyer’s guide to LLM observability tools (tracing, evals, prompt management) and what you still need for audit-grade evidence.
For engineering and compliance teams choosing tracing/evals tooling and trying to understand what auditors will still ask for.
Ultimo aggiornamento: 17 dic 2025 · Versione v1.0 · Non costituisce consulenza legale.
Summary
What these tools solve well
LLM observability tools make it easier to debug, evaluate, and improve agent workflows: traces, latency/cost, prompt iterations, datasets, and human labeling.
They are necessary, but regulated audits usually require an additional layer: decision governance and evidence exports (who approved, what policy applied, and what proof can be verified).
Checklist
Common capabilities
- Tracing and run histories (prompt/inputs/outputs).
- Evaluation workflows (LLM-as-judge, custom scorers, datasets).
- Prompt management and versioning.
- Monitoring dashboards and alerts.
Regulated gap
The regulated gap (what audits still require)
- Policy-as-code checkpoints that gate high-risk actions (block/review/allow) with evidence of enforcement.
- Role-aware review queues and escalation procedures for approvals and overrides.
- Risk-tiered sampling policy and near-miss tracking as controls (not just metrics).
- Verifiable evidence export bundles (manifest + checksums) mapped to Annex IV deliverables.
Compare
Comparisons (start here)
- LangSmith, Langfuse, Phoenix, and Traceloop are great when the buyer is engineering and the goal is iteration speed.
- KLA is built for regulated workflows where the buyer must produce oversight records and evidence packs.