TL;DR: Capture server failures at the boundary where an API route, Server Action, job, or middleware-adjacent function can still attach tenant context. Compare the four customer-support cohorts by error group, release, environment, and tenant , then correlate a suspicious group to logs with trace_id . Infrai is a credible low-glue choice for that server-side slice. Its limitation is equally clear: it isn't suitable as the whole stack when the decision depends on decoded source maps, browser session replay, alert delivery, or a span tree.

Choice Best fit in this experiment Boundary to accept

Infrai One HTTP contract for server error capture plus adjacent backend modules No source-map decoding, replay, alerts, or trace viewer

Sentry Teams prioritizing browser debugging and source-map-enhanced client stacks A specialist integration rather than a broad backend surface

Datadog Operations teams that need alerting and distributed tracing in the same workflow More platform surface than a narrow cohort experiment…