From dynatrace
Query and analyze a Dynatrace tenant's actual billing and usage data with DQL — DPS consumption breakdown, cost ranking, chargeback, trends, and entity-level drill-down.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/dynatrace:dt-platform-costsThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
> **⛔ FIRST — CHECK SCOPE BEFORE DOING ANYTHING ELSE.**
⛔ FIRST — CHECK SCOPE BEFORE DOING ANYTHING ELSE. This skill only queries and analyzes a tenant's actual consumption data. It does not teach billing concepts. If the user is asking how billing/pricing works, how costs are calculated, what units / normalization weights / the rate card mean, or any conceptual "explain" question about DPS billing — this skill does not answer it. See Billing Concepts — STOP and respond with only the prescribed two-sentence documentation redirect. Do not explain units, weights, included volume, or methodology, and do not show the Getting Started menu. Continue into the rest of this skill only when the user wants to query or analyze their own tenant's numbers.
Query and analyze Dynatrace platform billing and cost data using DQL. All data
lives in dt.system.events with event.kind == "BILLING_USAGE_EVENT",
segmented by event.type (consumption category).
Scope boundary: This skill covers Dynatrace platform billing (DPS consumption). For AWS cloud infrastructure costs ingested via FOCUS, use
dt-biz-cloud-costsinstead.
This skill applies exclusively to DPS-licensed environments. All billing event types, unit conversions, the public rate card, and cost estimation workflows are DPS-specific.
NEVER apply this skill's unit conversions or cost estimates to classic license models (host units, DDUs, DEM units, ASUs). If the user mentions classic licensing terms or units, explain that this skill covers DPS only and refer them to https://docs.dynatrace.com/docs/license/monitoring-consumption-classic for details.
Triggers: "Am I allowed to use X?", "Is X licensed?", "Is X in my subscription?", "Do I have entitlement for X?"
STOP — do not execute any DQL queries. Billing usage events record active consumption only, not subscription entitlements. Absence of billing events means not currently consumed, NOT unlicensed. Do not infer entitlement from usage patterns or their absence. Respond directly without queries and direct to Account Management > Subscription > Pricing.
❌ Query billing events → no results → conclude "not licensed" — WRONG (absence ≠ no entitlement) ✅ Respond immediately: "Entitlement data is not available via DQL. Check Account Management > Subscription > Pricing."
Triggers: "How does billing work?", "How are costs calculated?", "Explain DPS billing", "How is X billed?", "What is the billing model?", "How does DPS pricing work?", "How does Dynatrace charge?", "Explain the rate card"
STOP — do not answer from this skill's content. The normalization weights, unit conversion formulas, and lookup values in this skill are DQL-generation tools, not user-facing billing education. Presenting them as an explanation of DPS billing is wrong — they are internal ranking aids, not contracted rates.
Your entire response must be ONLY the two sentences below — nothing else. Do not list capabilities or units, do not describe metering, included volume, or normalization, do not add a "How costs are calculated" section, and do not append the Getting Started menu or a list of example prompts beyond the single one shown:
❌ Explain metering / units / normalization weights, then offer the Getting Started menu — WRONG (that is the exact failure to avoid) ✅ Respond with only: "For how DPS pricing and billing work, see the Dynatrace Platform Subscription documentation. If you'd like to analyze your tenant's actual consumption, ask e.g. 'What are my top cost drivers for the last 7 days?'"
This skill queries and analyzes existing consumption data. It is not a DPS pricing guide — for billing concepts, see the official documentation.
| User Request | Action | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| "how can you help", "what can you do", "where do I start", "help me understand my costs", "what can I analyze", "show me what's possible", "what is this skill", "help", "capabilities", "getting started", "tell me what you can do", "what are your capabilities" | Present Getting Started menu — 5 use cases with one suggested prompt each. Do not run any queries yet. | Getting Started |
| "am I allowed to use X", "is X licensed", "is X in my subscription", "entitlement for X", "can I use X from licensing perspective" | STOP — do not query. Respond directly: entitlement data is not available via DQL. Direct to Account Management > Subscription > Pricing. | Entitlement — STOP |
| "how does billing work", "how are costs calculated", "explain DPS billing", "how is X billed", "what is the billing model", "how does DPS pricing work", "how does Dynatrace charge", "explain the rate card" | STOP — do not answer from skill content. Respond directly: redirect to official documentation. | Billing Concepts — STOP |
| "usage overview", "usage per capability", "what am I using", "how much usage" | Cross-capability usage with unit conversion (no cost) | billing-capabilities.md -> Cross-Capability Usage (4 Queries) |
| "cost drivers", "what costs most", "top spenders", "where is spend going" | Run Combined Query + Full Inline Lookup, sort by cost_weight desc in DQL | cost-estimations.md -> Estimated Cost by Capability |
| "save money", "reduce costs", "billed costs", "actual bill" | Usage with included volume deduction, then cost estimation | billing-capabilities.md -> Cross-Capability Usage (4 Queries), then cost-estimations.md |
| "cost by team", "chargeback", "showback" | Cost center attribution | cost-allocation.md |
| "metrics ingest by cost center", "metrics chargeback", "billable data points per team" | Metrics Ingest billable volume per cost center (with included volume deduction) | cost-allocation.md -> Metrics Ingest — Billable Volume per Cost Center |
| "how much log ingest", "trace volume" (single category) | Single-category usage query | billing-event-types.md, billing-capabilities.md |
| "cost trend", "spending spike", "budget forecast" | Daily cost trend | cost-estimations.md -> Daily Cost Trend |
| "compare this week to last", "week over week", "WoW", "MoM", "month over month", "how did costs change", "cost change vs last week", "cost change vs last month", "period comparison", "what grew", "what shrank", "usage trend", "notable changes in usage" | Period Comparison — two explicit UTC windows, compare capability_usage per capability, sort by largest absolute cost-weight delta | cost-estimations.md -> Period Comparison (WoW / MoM) |
| "detector costs", "anomaly detector query cost", "ALERTING pool costs" | Cross-reference detector -> query cost | query-cost-attribution.md |
| "workflow cost", "what does this workflow cost", "workflow spending" | Composite workflow cost (3 signals) | workflow-total-cost.md |
| "what's driving costs", "cost investigation", "cost spike" | Step-by-step cost investigation | query-cost-attribution.md, workflow-total-cost.md, entity-cost-drilldown.md |
| "which app", "which host", "which monitor", "drill down", "break down by application/host/cluster" | Entity-based drill-down with sample-first step | entity-cost-drilldown.md |
| "what's driving RUM/Full-Stack/Synthetic/K8s cost" | Entity drill-down for specific capability | entity-cost-drilldown.md |
| "optimize metrics ingest", "reduce data points", "high cardinality metrics", "which metrics cost most", "metrics cost optimization" | Run analysis (Steps 1–3), present data and explain optimization levers, then wait for user to choose what to optimize — NEVER recommend specific metrics to drop/reduce | metrics-ingest-optimization.md |
| "drop metric", "remove metric from ingestion", "stop ingesting metric" | Drop metric strategy via OpenPipeline or OTel Collector | metrics-ingest-optimization.md -> Strategy 1 — Drop Metric |
| "reduce cardinality", "remove dimension", "drop dimension from metric" | Reduce cardinality strategy via OpenPipeline or OTel Collector | metrics-ingest-optimization.md -> Strategy 2 — Reduce Cardinality |
| "change ingest interval", "reduce collection frequency", "scrape interval" | Change ingest interval at source | metrics-ingest-optimization.md -> Strategy 3 — Change Ingest Interval |
| "query cost by source", "who is scanning most", "cost attribution by app" | BUE query cost by source | query-cost-attribution.md -> Step 1 |
| "expensive dashboards", "dashboard cost ranking", "top dashboards by cost" | Dashboard query cost ranking | query-cost-attribution.md -> Step 1b + Step 2 |
| "included volume", "billed vs total", "baseline usage" | Included volume analysis | billing-capabilities.md -> Included Volume |
| "hourly billing", "daily billing after deductions", "time-granular billed usage" | Time-bucketed usage with included volume subtracted | billing-capabilities.md -> Query 3 (Metrics Ingest — Billable Volume) / Query 4 (Traces Ingest — Billable Volume) |
cost_weight in DQL (via the Full Inline Lookup) for internal ordering/aggregation only. Never display cost_weight as a dollar amount. Omit from rankings for types not in the normalization table.cost_weight (computed in DQL via the Full Inline Lookup). Output columns: rank, capability name, usage in native units. Drop cost_weight before presenting — it never appears in any column, label, or sentence.Only add cost information when the user explicitly asks for it. Units are incomparable across categories — cost normalization is the only way to rank or sum them.
Preview types: Only capabilities explicitly marked as preview in cost-estimations.md are preview — never infer preview status from zero usage.
When any intent involves cost ranking or cost drivers (cost drivers, cost trend, workflow cost, query cost attribution, cost investigation, cost spike):
Compute cost_weight in DQL — run the base usage queries (Queries 1–4
from billing-capabilities.md) up through
the | summarize billable_usage step, then immediately append the
Full Inline Lookup for Cost Rankings.
The Full Inline Lookup handles unit conversion and cost weighting in one
step — do not also apply the Unit Conversion Lookup from
billing-capabilities.md; it is redundant and a chained lookup replaces
all existing lookup.* fields, which breaks the cost-weight computation.
Finish the query with | filter isNotNull(cost_weight) | sort cost_weight desc | fields event.type, capability_usage, cost_weight.
NEVER multiply normalization weights mentally — values span orders of
magnitude where silent arithmetic errors are undetectable.
Present rankings, not dollar amounts — the DQL results arrive pre-sorted. Drop the cost_weight column and present only: rank number, capability name, usage in native units (e.g. GiB, GiB-hours, sessions, data points — whatever unit that capability measures in). Never include a cost, weight, or dollar column. Example output for "top 5 cost drivers":
1. Log Management & Analytics - Ingest & Process 62.3 TiB
2. Full-Stack Monitoring 2,366,800 GiB-hours
3. Real User Monitoring 51.5M sessions
4. Infrastructure Monitoring 847,200 host-hours
5. Metrics - Ingest & Process 18.2B data points
For percentage questions, output a share-of-total table (see Cost share / percentage above). Never show raw USD estimates unless the user has provided their own contracted rate.
Disclaimer BEFORE results — applies to multi-capability results only (2+ capabilities, rankings, or percentage table). Copy this text verbatim — do not paraphrase or rephrase it:
ℹ️ Rankings show relative spend — for actual dollar figures, see Account Management > Subscription > Overview > Cost and usage details.
For single-capability results (exactly one capability, no cross-capability comparison): omit the disclaimer entirely — the result is straightforward billing data with no normalization involved.
Exception: if the response is in user-provided rate mode, include the warning required for that mode even for single-capability results. The single-capability omission applies only to the standard multi-capability ranking disclaimer above.
No supplementary rate-card notes — the prescribed disclaimer above is the only place normalization methodology may be referenced. Never add sentences like "These numbers are based on the public DPS rate card" or "based on public list prices" anywhere else in the response. This does not suppress the required warning for user-provided rate mode.
When a user asks a generic or open-ended question about costs, usage, or what the skill can do, respond with the menu below. Do not run any DQL queries yet — wait for the user to choose a direction.
Here's what you can explore:
Cost breakdown — See which capabilities are driving spend, ranked by relative cost.
"What are my top cost drivers for the last 7 days?"
Usage overview — Full picture of DPS consumption across all capabilities, in native units.
"Give me an overview of our platform usage across all capabilities."
Spike investigation — Attribute a cost spike to its source (dashboard, workflow, detector).
"My log query cost spiked last week — which source is causing it?"
Chargeback / showback — Break down cost by team, product, or cost center.
"Show me a cost breakdown by cost center for the last 30 days."
Metrics optimization — If metrics ingest is a top cost driver, drill into which metric keys are billable and reduce the highest-cost ones.
"Which metrics are driving our ingest cost? Help me optimize."
Which of these matches what you're trying to do?
dt.system.eventsdt-dql-essentials before writing queries — covers DQL syntax, type
handling, and field discovery via dt.semantic_dictionary.fields| # | Reference | Content |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | billing-event-types.md | Billing event type catalog — fields, metering intervals, per-type tables |
| 2 | billing-capabilities.md | BUE-to-capability mapping, unit conversion, cross-category usage queries, included volume deduction |
| 3 | cost-estimations.md | Cost normalization weights, unit conversion lookup, cost estimation queries, full inline lookup for dashboards |
| 4 | cost-allocation.md | Cost center/product attribution, chargeback queries |
| 5 | query-cost-attribution.md | Query scan cost attribution — BUE by source, per-detector breakdown (ALERTING pool), QEE drill-down |
| 6 | workflow-total-cost.md | Workflow total cost — three billing signals (query scan, AppEngine, workflow-hours) |
| 7 | entity-cost-drilldown.md | Entity-based cost drill-down — RUM/Host/Synthetic/K8s/Security/Automation by entity |
| 8 | metrics-ingest-optimization.md | Per-metric-key cost drill-down — cardinality analysis, timeseries verification, optimization target identification |
fetch dt.system.events, from: -7d
| filter event.kind == "BILLING_USAGE_EVENT"
| summarize event_count = count(), by: {event.type}
| sort event_count desc
event.kind first — avoids scanning irrelevant events.~ for approximation — use ≈ or "approximately" (bare ~ creates Markdown strikethrough).count() fans out — confirm one-row-per-thing before counting — both
QUERY_EXECUTION_EVENT (one row per bucket touched per DQL statement) and
WORKFLOW_EVENT WORKFLOW_EXECUTION (≈2 rows per run: start + completion)
over-count when you count() them. For DQL-statement volume use
countDistinct(query_id); for workflow run count and frequency use
countDistinct(dt.automation_engine.workflow_execution.id) on
WORKFLOW_EXECUTION — never bare count(). Never write "ran N times" or
compute a per-second/per-minute rate from any raw count(). See
query-cost-attribution.md § Step 3
and workflow-total-cost.md § How Often Did the Workflow Run.entityName() (and any function that
takes a dt.entity.* field to resolve entity metadata) is deprecated.
Present raw dt.entity.* IDs (e.g. HOST-1A2B3C) in results. Grouping or
counting on the ID (by: {dt.entity.host}, countDistinct(dt.entity.host))
is fine — that uses the ID as a plain value. See
entity-cost-drilldown.md § Entity IDs in Results.scanned_bytes and BUE billed_bytes totals indicates zero-rated usage, not a pipeline issue. See query-cost-attribution.md § Investigating QEE↔BUE Mismatches.npx claudepluginhub dynatrace/dynatrace-for-ai --plugin dynatraceAnalyzes costs using organization-specific custom dimensions like teams, products, features, business units, or applications defined in CloudZero CostFormation to enable business-aligned cost visibility and showback/chargeback reporting
Reduces Grafana Cloud costs by attributing spend to teams and reducing telemetry volume with Adaptive Metrics, Logs, and Traces. Includes usage alerts and optimization checklist.
Analyzes Azure cloud costs on FinOps hubs using KQL queries in Azure Data Explorer. Handles trends, anomalies, recommendations, deployments, and operations via structured agent framework.