Auditable Graph-Guided Root Cause Analysis for Kubernetes Incidents
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Kubernetes incidents are diagnosed reliably only when a root-cause system's reported gains come from incident evidence rather than scenario-specific shortcuts. We present Graph Traversal Agent, a graph-guided RCA agent that combines LLM reasoning with specialized tools. The model reasons over a typed evidence graph, while deterministic graph and tool operations collect evidence, bound the search, and check proposed verdicts. We map operational constraints, including read-only evidence collection, propagation-aware diagnosis, bounded execution, and independently validated verdicts, to a typed incident graph, a LangGraph traversal state machine, and a separate validation stage. On ITBench snapshots scored by one fixed qwen-plus judge, the audited system raises root-cause-entity F1 over an earlier iteration of the same system from 0.6087 to 0.9130 on a 23-scenario common subset. A prompt-level ablation separates prompt-tuned gains from gains that survive once scenario-specific hints are removed: the stripped-prompt configuration retains 0.6958 F1 on a 19-scenario subset. The surviving gain concentrates on ChaosMesh scenarios whose ground-truth root cause is the injected fault object already present in the evidence graph, so we report it as benchmark-coupled rather than broad cross-cluster RCA evidence. Lightweight checks, including same-judge comparison, prompt-level ablation, cascade-source checking, and a telemetry no-leak test, mark claims as supported, pending, or out of scope. We scope the work to ITBench OpenTelemetry-demo snapshots. Live-cluster trials served as an engineering stress test, but alert state and trace availability did not stay stable enough for controlled scoring, so we make no production-readiness or mean-time-to-repair claim.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 16 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Jun 2026.
Builds on
15 of 16 references.
References · 15
- 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
- 2025Why Do Multi-Agent LLM Systems Fail?cited by 604
- 2023Automatic Root Cause Analysis via Large Language Models for Cloud Incidentscited by 84
- 2023RCAgent: Cloud Root Cause Analysis by Autonomous Agents with Tool-Augmented Large Language Modelscited by 65
- 2025ITBench: Evaluating AI Agents across Diverse Real-World IT Automation Taskscited by 51
- 2025Flow-of-Action: SOP Enhanced LLM-Based Multi-Agent System for Root Cause Analysiscited by 34
- 2024mABC: multi-Agent Blockchain-Inspired Collaboration for root cause analysis in micro-services architecturecited by 26
- 2025STRATUS: A Multi-agent System for Autonomous Reliability Engineering of Modern Cloudscited by 19
- 2025A Survey of AIOps in the Era of Large Language Modelscited by 19
- 2025COCA: Generative Root Cause Analysis for Distributed Systems with Code Knowledgecited by 11
- 2026Why Do AI Agents Systematically Fail at Cloud Root Cause Analysis?cited by 9
- 2025Simplifying Root Cause Analysis in Kubernetes with StateGraph and LLMcited by 4
3 more
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Cloud-OpsBench: A Reproducible Benchmark for Agentic Root Cause Analysis in Cloud Systems
- 2026Stalled, Biased, and Confused: Uncovering Reasoning Failures in LLMs for Cloud-Based Root Cause Analysis
- 2026Agentic Diagnostic Reasoning over Telecom and Datacenter Infrastructure
- 2026Graphical Causal Reasoning for Root Cause Analysis in Cloud Networks
- 2026STAR: A Stage-attributed Triage and Repair framework for RCA Agents in Microservices
- 2026Agentic Root Cause Analysis through Evidence-Grounded Reasoning
- 2026GALA: Graph-Augmented LLM Agents for Root Cause Analysis and Incident Response in Microservices
- 2026EviRCA: Decoupling Evidence Extraction from Reasoning for Microservice Root-Cause Analysis