Summary
Agentless-enabled integrations that are GA when deployed with Elastic Agent can still be beta (or another pre-GA stage) when deployed agentless. On individual integration pages, the top-page metadata currently reflects only the package-level release status, not the agentless deployment release status.
Example: Microsoft Defender for Endpoint shows GA in page frontmatter and the details table, while agentless deployment is described as beta only in the Requirements → Agentless enabled integration section.
We need ingest/integrations and docs alignment on whether individual integration pages should surface agentless-specific maturity near the top of the page, and if so, how.
Problem
Customers and support may infer full GA supportability from top-of-page badges when they are planning or using agentless deployment. That mismatch has caused confusion about support expectations.
Today, agentless maturity is communicated in:
Individual integration pages still do not clearly distinguish:
| Deployment mode |
Example (Microsoft Defender for Endpoint) |
| Agent-based (stack / serverless) |
GA |
| Agentless |
Beta |
Background / related work
This issue is a follow-up to broader work tracked internally in docs-content-internal#445. Much of the upstream work is complete; this issue focuses on individual integration page metadata.
Completed upstream work
In progress (separate from this issue)
| Issue |
Scope |
| docs-content#6661 |
Update integration-docs automation to read deployment_modes.agentless.release in the agentless quick reference table |
Related Kibana / ingest context
Related but out of scope for this issue
Current behavior (integration-docs automation)
Individual integration pages are generated from EPR data in integration-docs:
- Frontmatter
applies_to (stack, serverless) uses package semver / lifecycle
- Details table Version row uses package semver via
getLifecycle(version)
deployment_modes.agentless.release is available in manifests but is not used for top-of-page metadata on individual pages
Relevant generator files:
src/make-new-md-file/make-frontmatter.js
src/make-new-md-file/make-details.js
src/get-integrations.js
For default-value logic when deployment_modes.agentless.release is absent, see @MichelLosier's comment on docs-content-internal#445 and Kibana’s getAgentlessRelease in kibana#264504.
Questions for ingest / integrations
- Is the Kibana UI + agentless quick reference table sufficient, or should individual integration pages also surface agentless maturity near the top?
- If yes, which approach do we prefer?
- A. Add an Agentless release status row to the details table when
deployment_modes.agentless.enabled === true
- B. Add a section-level
{applies_to} / product badge on the Agentless enabled integration section only
- C. Introduce a new
applies_to dimension for agentless (would require docs-builder support)
- D. Other (please specify)
- Should frontmatter
stack / serverless stay GA when the agent-based integration is GA, even if agentless is beta? (Probably yes — we probably shouldn't mark the whole integration beta for agent-based users.)
- After agentless platform goes GA, should integration teams update
deployment_modes.agentless.release: ga individually, or is there a planned bulk/default behavior?
Proposed acceptance criteria (TBD after discussion)
cc: @nimarezainia @MichelLosier @lucabelluccini @vishaangelova @jsoriano @theletterf
Summary
Agentless-enabled integrations that are GA when deployed with Elastic Agent can still be beta (or another pre-GA stage) when deployed agentless. On individual integration pages, the top-page metadata currently reflects only the package-level release status, not the agentless deployment release status.
Example: Microsoft Defender for Endpoint shows GA in page frontmatter and the details table, while agentless deployment is described as beta only in the Requirements → Agentless enabled integration section.
We need ingest/integrations and docs alignment on whether individual integration pages should surface agentless-specific maturity near the top of the page, and if so, how.
Problem
Customers and support may infer full GA supportability from top-of-page badges when they are planning or using agentless deployment. That mismatch has caused confusion about support expectations.
Today, agentless maturity is communicated in:
Individual integration pages still do not clearly distinguish:
Background / related work
This issue is a follow-up to broader work tracked internally in docs-content-internal#445. Much of the upstream work is complete; this issue focuses on individual integration page metadata.
Completed upstream work
releaseunderdeployment_modes.agentlessrelease: betafor agentless; CSPM set togaIn progress (separate from this issue)
integration-docsautomation to readdeployment_modes.agentless.releasein the agentless quick reference tableRelated Kibana / ingest context
Related but out of scope for this issue
Current behavior (integration-docs automation)
Individual integration pages are generated from EPR data in
integration-docs:applies_to(stack,serverless) uses package semver / lifecyclegetLifecycle(version)deployment_modes.agentless.releaseis available in manifests but is not used for top-of-page metadata on individual pagesRelevant generator files:
src/make-new-md-file/make-frontmatter.jssrc/make-new-md-file/make-details.jssrc/get-integrations.jsFor default-value logic when
deployment_modes.agentless.releaseis absent, see @MichelLosier's comment on docs-content-internal#445 and Kibana’sgetAgentlessReleasein kibana#264504.Questions for ingest / integrations
deployment_modes.agentless.enabled === true{applies_to}/ product badge on the Agentless enabled integration section onlyapplies_todimension for agentless (would require docs-builder support)stack/serverlessstay GA when the agent-based integration is GA, even if agentless is beta? (Probably yes — we probably shouldn't mark the whole integration beta for agent-based users.)deployment_modes.agentless.release: gaindividually, or is there a planned bulk/default behavior?Proposed acceptance criteria (TBD after discussion)
integration-docsautomation updated accordingly (if applicable)cc: @nimarezainia @MichelLosier @lucabelluccini @vishaangelova @jsoriano @theletterf