docs(integration): Add groundcover integration guide and screenshot

[noamApps]

• Added Groundcover integration docs describing LLM observability setup with two tracing submission options (direct sensor and BYOC endpoint).
• Included example environment variable configurations and links to relevant Groundcover/OpenTelemetry documentation.
• Updated the integrations catalog to include the new Groundcover entry.

---

Important

Adds Groundcover integration guide to OpenLLMetry documentation and updates integrations catalog.

• Documentation:
  • Adds groundcover.mdx with integration guide for Groundcover, detailing LLM observability setup with direct sensor and BYOC endpoint options.
  • Includes example environment variable configurations and links to Groundcover/OpenTelemetry documentation.
• Integrations Catalog:
  • Updates introduction.mdx to include Groundcover entry in the integrations catalog.

^{This description was created by for 09f0dce. You can customize this summary. It will automatically update as commits are pushed.}

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Documentation

  • New Groundcover integration guide added with step-by-step setup for sending traces via direct sensor or BYOC cloud endpoints, including example environment variable and API key configuration and links to further resources.

• New Features

  • Groundcover integration added to the integrations catalog, enabling LLM observability and distributed tracing alongside existing providers.

_{✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.}

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

Adds a new Groundcover integration doc and registers it in the integrations catalog and mint list; no code or public API changes.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Groundcover integration doc openllmetry/integrations/groundcover.mdx	New documentation page describing Groundcover as an observability option and two trace-sending setups (direct sensor and BYOC ingestion), with example environment variables and links.
Integrations catalog UI openllmetry/integrations/introduction.mdx	Added a new Card entry for the Groundcover integration to the integrations catalog.
Integration registry mint.json	Added openllmetry/integrations/groundcover to the integrations list.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes

• Check openllmetry/integrations/groundcover.mdx for clarity, accuracy of env var examples, and link targets.
• Verify the new Card entry in openllmetry/integrations/introduction.mdx renders correctly and follows catalog conventions.
• Confirm mint.json entry format matches other integration entries.

Poem

🐇 I hopped through docs to mark the way,
Traces find Groundcover by night and day,
A short note, a mint-line,
Catalogs now align,
Hooray — observability’s in play!

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title accurately reflects the main changes: adding documentation for a Groundcover integration with a guide and screenshot.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

✨ Finishing touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment

---

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Disabled knowledge base sources:

• Linear integration is disabled by default for public repositories

You can enable these sources in your CodeRabbit configuration.

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 09f0dce and 574f753.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• mint.json (1 hunks)

🔇 Additional comments (1)

mint.json (1)

121-121: LGTM. The integration entry is correctly formatted and placed in alphabetical order between "grafana" and "highlight". The corresponding documentation file exists at openllmetry/integrations/groundcover.mdx.

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[ellipsis-dev]

Important

Looks good to me! 👍

Reviewed everything up to 09f0dce in 1 minute and 46 seconds. Click for details.

• Reviewed 54 lines of code in 2 files
• Skipped 1 files when reviewing.
• Skipped posting 4 draft comments. View those below.
• Modify your settings and rules to customize what types of comments Ellipsis leaves. And don't forget to react with 👍 or 👎 to teach Ellipsis.

1. openllmetry/integrations/groundcover.mdx:7

• Draft comment:
  Consider adding an alt attribute to the tag for improved accessibility.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 33% <= threshold 50% None

2. openllmetry/integrations/introduction.mdx:26

• Draft comment:
  Consider capitalizing the integration name for consistency (e.g., 'Groundcover' instead of 'groundcover').
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Confidence changes required: 33% <= threshold 50% None

3. openllmetry/integrations/groundcover.mdx:2

• Draft comment:
  Typo: In the title, "OpenLLMetry" should likely be "OpenTelemetry" to match the rest of the document.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Based on historical feedback, this comment is too similar to comments previously marked by users as bad.

4. openllmetry/integrations/introduction.mdx:26

• Draft comment:
  The added Card for groundcover uses a lowercase title ('groundcover'), which might be inconsistent with the capitalization of the other integration titles. Consider capitalizing it as 'Groundcover' if that's consistent with the style guide.
• Reason this comment was not posted:
  Decided after close inspection that this draft comment was likely wrong and/or not actionable: usefulness confidence = 20% vs. threshold = 50% This is a style/consistency comment. Looking at the evidence, every single other integration in the list uses proper capitalization or title case. However, "groundcover" might be the official brand name with lowercase styling (like "iPhone" or "eBay" but in reverse). The comment uses "might be inconsistent" and "if that's consistent with the style guide" - this is speculative language. The rules say not to make speculative comments and to assume the author did things correctly. If groundcover is the official brand name, the author would have used it correctly. This is a minor style issue that doesn't affect functionality. The comment does point out a real inconsistency in the file - every other integration uses capitalization. This could be a legitimate oversight rather than intentional branding. The comment is actionable with a clear suggestion. While there is an observable pattern, I cannot definitively know whether "groundcover" is the correct branding or if it should be "Groundcover". The comment itself acknowledges uncertainty with "might be" and "if that's consistent". According to the rules, I should not make speculative comments and should assume the author made the change correctly. This is a minor style issue, not a functional problem. This comment should be deleted. It's speculative about whether the capitalization is correct, and we should assume the author used the correct branding for "groundcover". The rules state not to make speculative comments and to assume changes were made correctly, especially for minor style issues.

Workflow ID: wflow_RR7KN0iDBVmfBDeL

^{You can customize by changing your verbosity settings, reacting with 👍 or 👎, replying to comments, or adding code review rules.}

[nirga]

Thanks @noamApps!