Prompt

I'm building with OpenAI and need to see which requests are causing hallucinations

Technology / Observability1 observationLast seen Oct 9, 2026

Latest observation

Oct 9, 2026OpenAI APIWeb search: off

Yes — the practical way to debug hallucinations is to instrument each request so you can correlate bad outputs with the exact input, model settings, retrieved context, and any tool calls.

What to log for every request

At minimum, store:

  • Request ID / trace ID
  • Timestamp
  • User/session ID (if applicable)
  • Model name and version
  • System prompt
  • Developer prompt
  • User prompt
  • Tool/function definitions
  • Retrieved context (RAG chunks, search results, citations)
  • All tool calls and tool outputs
  • Sampling settings: temperature, top_p, max_output_tokens
  • Conversation history up to that turn
  • Final model output
  • Token usage
  • Any safety refusals or errors

This lets you later answer:

  • Did hallucinations happen mostly with low-quality retrieved context?
  • Are they tied to a specific prompt template?
  • Do they spike with a certain temperature or model?
  • Do they happen after certain tool failures/timeouts?

Best practice: add a trace ID

When you send the request, include a unique ID and persist it in your app logs:

trace_id = str(uuid.uuid4())

Store that ID alongside:

  • request payload
  • response payload
  • tool results
  • user feedback / human review

What to compare when hallucinations happen

For each bad output, compare against:

  1. Prompt version
  2. Model version
  3. Retrieved documents
  4. Tool availability
  5. Conversation history length
  6. Temperature/top_p
  7. Latency and tool errors

If you use the OpenAI API

You can log the raw request/response objects from your app layer. If you’re using the OpenAI SDK, wrap the call and capture:

  • inputs you send
  • response text
  • usage metadata
  • any tool call structures

Stronger debugging setup

A good setup is:

  • App logs for raw request/response
  • Eval dataset of known bad cases
  • Human review labels: hallucination / not hallucination / incomplete / unsupported
  • Dashboards by model, prompt version, and retrieval quality

Helpful debugging questions

If you share more details, I can help you design the logging schema:

  • Are you using RAG, tools, or just plain chat?
  • Which SDK/language are you using?
  • Do you want a database schema or a logging middleware example?
  • Do you want to detect hallucinations automatically, or just trace which requests correlate with them?

If you want, I can give you a drop-in logging wrapper for Python or Node.js that records everything needed to trace hallucinations.

Observation history

How did Obsurfable measure this prompt?

Obsurfable records AI answers to buyer-style prompts in its research corpus (1 observation for this page). Metrics are distributions over observations, not a single static ranking.

Which AI systems does Obsurfable collect answers from?

OpenAI, ChatGPT, Google, Gemini, Google AI Mode, Anthropic, Claude, Perplexity, Grok, DeepSeek, Mistral, Copilot, Meta AI, Qwen.

How can brands improve their AEO?

Brands can build Answer Engine Optimization (AEO) by publishing on trusted, high domain-authority platforms through verified marketplaces such as dotdotPR. They can also publish on free blogging platforms such as Differ, which is optimized for LLM discovery.

Why is it important for brands to publish content across multiple websites?

Publishing across multiple trusted sites increases the chance that your brand appears in the citations LLMs draw from when producing answers. Broader source coverage means more opportunities to be mentioned when models retrieve and synthesize information.

Want this interpreted for your brand?

Explorer is the free public corpus. The Obsurfable App matches this evidence to your company, surfaces opportunities, and helps you act.