Add span event matcher to JUnit trace assertions

[PerfectSlayer]

What Does This Do

Adds a SpanEventMatcher to the JUnit trace assertions, mirroring SpanLinkMatcher:

span()
    .tags(defaultTags(), tag(SPAN_KIND, is(SPAN_KIND_INTERNAL)))
    .events(
        event("event1").time(TIME_NANO, NANOSECONDS),
        event("event2").attributes(singletonMap("string-key", "string-value")))

• event(name) matches an event that has no attributes and a time within the span start and end times.
• .time(timestamp, unit) and .attributes(Map) replace these defaults.
• span().events(...) expects the same number of events, in the same order, like links(...).
• defaultTags() accepts the events tag, as it already does for _dd.span_links.

OpenTelemetry14Test now asserts structured events and links instead of decoding the JSON of the events and _dd.span_links tags. As a result, the jsonassert test dependency is removed.

Motivation

Span events are now structured in core, and the events tag is only their v0.4/v0.5 encoding.
Tests should assert span data, not a protocol detail.

Additional Notes

Contributor Checklist

• Format the title according to the contribution guidelines
• Assign the type: and (comp: or inst:) labels in addition to any other useful labels
• Avoid using close, fix, or any linking keywords when referencing an issue
  Use solves instead, and assign the PR milestone to the issue
• Update the CODEOWNERS file on source file addition, migration, or deletion
• Update public documentation with any new configuration flags or behaviors
• Once approved, use merge queue to merge the PR

Jira ticket: [PROJ-IDENT]

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-10-09T10:19:13.151306Z	3515e49	Draft marked ready
🔒 Security Review	✅ Completed 2026-10-09T10:18:11.971642Z	3515e49	Draft marked ready

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 3515e494d4

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[datadog-datadog-prod-us1-2]

More details

The event matcher’s defaults and ordered, exact-count checks are consistent with the structured span data used by the migrated OpenTelemetry assertions.

Was this helpful? React 👍 or 👎

_{Open Bits AI session}

_{🤖 Bits Code Review · Commit 3515e49 · @DataDog review to ask questions}

[datadog-datadog-prod-us1-2]

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
• Patch Coverage: 100.00%
• Overall Coverage: 68.82% (+9.32%)

_{This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 4f318a7 | Docs | Give us feedback!}

[dd-octo-sts]

🟢 Java Benchmark SLOs — All performance SLOs passed

Suite	Status
Startup	🟢 pass

SLO thresholds are defined here based on automatically generated metrics. A warning is raised when results are within 5% of the threshold.

PR vs. master results

Scenario	Candidate	master	Δ (95% CI of mean)
startup:insecure-bank:iast:Agent	13.95 s	13.96 s	[-0.9%; +0.8%] (no difference)
startup:insecure-bank:tracing:Agent	12.87 s	13.00 s	[-1.8%; -0.2%] (maybe better)
startup:petclinic:appsec:Agent	17.18 s	16.48 s	[-0.2%; +8.7%] (no difference)
startup:petclinic:iast:Agent	16.90 s	17.03 s	[-1.6%; +0.1%] (no difference)
startup:petclinic:profiling:Agent	16.71 s	16.63 s	[-0.4%; +1.4%] (no difference)
startup:petclinic:sca:Agent	16.58 s	16.91 s	[-6.2%; +2.2%] (no difference)
startup:petclinic:tracing:Agent	16.08 s	15.98 s	[-0.3%; +1.6%] (no difference)

Commit: 4f318a7c · CI Pipeline · Benchmarking Platform UI

---

Load and DaCapo benchmarks can be triggered manually in the GitLab pipeline. Results will appear in the Benchmarking Platform UI after completion.

[AlexeyKuznetsov-DD]

Looks much better than ugly strings with JSONs!

[datadog-datadog-prod-us1-2]

More details

The event matcher and migrated OpenTelemetry assertions align with structured span data. Static review found that the metadata-processing flags preserve existing serializer behavior.

Was this helpful? React 👍 or 👎

_{Open Bits AI session}

_{🤖 Bits Code Review · Commit efd35e6}

[PerfectSlayer]

/merge

[gh-worker-devflow-routing-ef8351]

View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.

2026-10-13 05:39:58 UTC ℹ️ Start processing command /merge

---

2026-10-13 05:40:07 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: Pull request is not mergeable yet

It will be processed automatically as soon as GitHub reports it as mergeable. View in MergeQueue UI.

• Run /code blockers to see what is blocking it.
• Run /remove to cancel it.

---

2026-10-13 06:05:18 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: merge request added to the queue

The expected merge time in master is approximately 1h (p90).

---

2026-10-13 07:20:06 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: This merge request was merged