[Rachael-Graham]

Move the tool-attributes paragraph and the Verify the setup steps of the Audit prompts page into snippets.

Two snippets are new under snippets/observability/. audit-tool-attributes.md holds the paragraph about the gcp.vertex.agent.tool_call_args and tool_response attributes, now split into two paragraphs so the snippet renders as a block. audit-verify-steps.md holds the whole numbered list under Verify the setup, including the Grafana and Jaeger tabs.

The page itself keeps its prose, its procedure, and the existing tracing-backend.md and claude-logs-backend.md calls. Readers see the same text as before.

Worth a close look: the {{< tabs >}} block now renders from inside a reuse snippet, the first snippet in this repo to do so. A built-page diff against main shows whitespace only, plus the tool paragraph split.

Separately, captureContent=true no longer records content on the kagent runtime since kagent#3153. That bug is unrelated to this PR and is not filed yet.

To review, compare the rendered observability/audit-prompts page with production.

[github-actions]

Docs preview

Link	Points at
Branch preview	The newest push to this branch. Updates in place.
Commit preview	307c2b3 only. Frozen.

Both are uploaded Worker versions and serve no production traffic.

[kristin-kronstain-brown]

This is a pre-existing problem, but since the text is moving anyway: both tabs just said the span shows "the three attributes", and then this line says "If both attributes read {}". I think it means the two message attributes. Suggestion:

If gen_ai.input.messages and gen_ai.output.messages read {}, the Session started without content capture.

Also, this line and the "previous section printed Current" reference tie the snippet to this one page. That's fine for a single-use override point. Just know that it isn't reusable elsewhere as written.

[kristin-kronstain-brown]

Small drift from a pure move. "the three attributes that [What a record holds] describes" became "the three attributes described in [What a record holds]" here and on line 29. The PR body says the built-page diff is whitespace only plus the tool paragraph split, so this change is unannounced. It's fine either way. Either revert it to keep the move clean, or mention it in the body so a reviewer comparing against production isn't surprised.

[kristin-kronstain-brown]

Nit: the split works, but the new second paragraph reads awkwardly on its own ("Treat the two tool attributes as part of the audit record, and as a disclosure to account for on an agent whose tools return sensitive data"). Maybe:

Treat the two tool attributes as part of the audit record. On an agent whose tools return sensitive data, account for them as a disclosure.

Separately, I'm not sure the split is needed. With the extras reuse rendering inline by default, a single-paragraph snippet at the top level emits bare text without <p>, and the extras CSS doesn't care. If you saw an actual rendering difference, ignore this.