Finance requires chargebacks for a shared multi-agent platform used by three business units. Today all Foundry usage lands under one subscription with no attribution. What cost-management design should the platform team implement?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
You need attribution, so tag resources, emit per-agent or per-workload IDs in telemetry, set quotas and budgets with alerts, and build chargeback reports that map tokens and tool calls to business units. Turning off diagnostics blinds you, blanket Owner rights are a security anti-pattern, and personal spreadsheets don't scale or audit. Make cost a first-class monitoring concern alongside quality and reliability.
Full Explanation
Cost monitoring for multi-agent solutions includes usage, quotas, allocations, and chargebacks. The correct design implements the required control plane: resource tags, workload identity in telemetry, budgets/alerts, and mapped reporting that ties tokens and tool calls to owning teams. Disabling all diagnostics to reduce the bill and sending a single flat invoice annually reduces visibility and fails finance requirements. Giving every developer Owner on the subscription violates least privilege and does not produce systematic attribution. Storing cost data only in personal spreadsheets maintained by each agent author lacks standardization, auditability, and automation. Combine Azure cost management constructs with application-level token metrics so expensive agents and tools are visible to owning teams before overruns occur.