Your data. Anywhere you go.

New Relic for iOS or Android

Download on the App Store    Android App on Google play

New Relic Insights App for iOS

Download on the App Store

Learn more

Close icon

Feature Idea: Is it possible to add a runbook URL to an infrastructure alert?



Is there any way to add a runbook URL to an infrastructure alert? The emails have a spot for the runbook URL, but I can’t find any way to configure it in the infrastructure alerts page.

New Relic edit

  • I want this, too
  • I have more info to share (reply below)
  • I have a solution for this

0 voters


Hi @cpu, it doesn’t look like there is an option for a runbook URL when configuring alerts from the Infrastructure UI. I agree that this would be great feature to make full use of the options Alerts has to offer, and have updated your post as an Infrastructure feature idea.


The simplest way to get there will be by clicking the policy link from the Infrastructure UI. That will take your directly to the Alerts page where you can select the notification channels tab and add whichever channel has the configured runbook URL. Being able to manage more than just an email address when you create a new Alerts policy from the Infrastructure UI would be pretty handy, though!


Hi @parrott, not sure if I follow what you’re suggesting. Our runbook is an internal page, it’s not related to any channel. I would just like to add a runbook URL to the email sent out as per alerts created from the alerts page.

There is a spot in the email for the runbook URL, but I can’t find any way to configure it for infrastructure alerts.


You are of course correct. The runbook is set within the condition and since Infrastructure conditions are managed in the Infrastructure UI the option to set that is not available. Please disregard my reply above and I apologize for the confusion.



Is there any way to achieve that? I need to add runbook URL to Infrastructure Alerts, based on Integration with AWS. Is it doable via API (GUI doesn’t allow us to do that)


Lukasz Ciechanowicz


Not a way to achieve this in the way you explained right now, @lukasz . Thank you for sharing your use case—it’s great to have the context behind why our customers are reaching out about a possible feature.

Please make sure and vote above and I will pass your feedback to our Product Management team.


This is actually a blocker that prevents us from migrating to Infrastructure alerting. Our alerts are required to include the link to the runbook in the alert. We can do this with all other New Relic alert implementations:
APM application metric
NRQL Query
Plugins metric
Server metric
Synthetics monitor failure

Not sure this is really a feature request. Sometimes missing function is a bug. Even if the bug is we forgot about it. I understand that we do not want to wait for everything to be delivered before we can begin to use the product, but seems to me that Runbook URL should be “in plan” rather than a feature idea. (for 6 months)


Quite honestly, I’m shocked Runbook URL’s weren’t built into the Infrastructure Alerting functionality…

We are undergoing an internal effort to enforce the use of Runbooks across all failure conditions across all alert policies. Considering that it was present for Servers and not Infrastructure is also surprising.

I think New Relic should be proactive on this one, rather than awaiting any further feedback from the community. Support for Runbook functionality is commonplace across nearly all alerting & incident management platforms so it is a necessity that support for this be added asap for Infrastructure as well.

We’ll be opening a support ticket on this one as well to drive the feature request as we need it for normal operations.


Well… We are trying to migrate from SERVERS to INFRASTRUCTURE, But, in this case, we can´t do it… Runbook is a MUST in our process (cause the alerts are sent to some people who don´t know how to fix the problem) So, with the alert, they need the runbook (Step by Step)
So, please your help with this, before May-18…



Same Here, we need to add URL for Runbooks or even some text message which Solution Article to use.


Added my vote as well.

As an operator, it’s important to be able to have just in time context delivery around alerts. Alert text can describe the problem, but often it is not immediately clear how to fix it or if certain actions should be avoided.


We totally hear you, @ben.hemphill - thank you SO much for adding a bit about your use case here. Be sure to check back on this thread and know I have passed your feedback along. :thumbsup:


Add Runbook URL into Infrastructure Alarms Feature…


:joy: Solid use of meme, @adv-it! I don’t have any news to share right now, but I will be sure to check in with our Infrastructure & Alerts teams to see if there is any update on the prioritization of this feature idea. Thanks for checking in!


:thumbsup: for this feature, we also want to add run/play book links for alerts. Would like them to be included in the Slack Notification too.


@Linds what’s the typical turnaround for highly voted feature ideas? Seems that there are plenty of feature ideas that sit around for a year or more and it’d be nice to have some estimate other than “real soon now.”


Hey @mruckman - While we don’t have a timeline, we do understand that waiting is frustrating. The engineering teams do prioritise features based on a number of factors, customer demand being one of them. That said there are hundreds of feature ideas here in the community, prioritising all of them is a difficult task. Though when feature ideas here on the community do get a lot of activity we try to bring them to the attention of the appropriate product managers, however we cannot guarantee a timeline.


What constitutes “a lot of activity” in this context? Is there a public, ordered list of what’s next on your roadmap? I know there are a lot of features to prioritize, but there are several feature requests that are surprisingly not part of the base set (which I agree with @mckennab, this is more like a bug) . This one for instance, or labeling of metrics, or easy reuse of alert conditions with more robust alert policies.

Just trying to get a feel for how much hope to have about requests becoming actual features. I figured “request-to-implemented” would be a metric you guys would track.


Hi @mruckman - We do not have a publicly accessible roadmap projection. The number of votes is not the only factor to look at in terms of activity, other things such as comments, and likes on a thread, as well as votes are considered. When a feature idea is submitted we log an internal request to the appropriate teams. With a lot of additional activity on a post we do try to bring in product managers, to both ensure they’re aware of the thread, and to share their thoughts in these threads for the community to get the official line on those features.

All that said, prioritisation decisions are made by our product teams. We here in the community do our best to get your voice heard within the product teams. They definitely appreciate the customer demand in their prioritisation, however we do not guarantee timelines on feature requests due to the fact that additional internal and external projects can alter the roadmap.

I’m happy to discuss this some more with you, if you have questions, feel free to DM me.