But how does that cause problems? b/c the monitoring software cannot see the errors?
Well, even if it did, it presumably wouldn't be able to make sense of the error field anyway; so it either has support for graph-ql specifically, or cannot see the errors.
If the resolution of monitoring is literally is-200/not-200 a basic level of customisation should allow for "has error field" as a second error condition. Saying "expects those arguments to have been settled a decade ago" ignores that little in HTTP endpoints is settled, and building brittle software around these assumptions is the problem.
Well, even if it did, it presumably wouldn't be able to make sense of the error field anyway; so it either has support for graph-ql specifically, or cannot see the errors.
If the resolution of monitoring is literally is-200/not-200 a basic level of customisation should allow for "has error field" as a second error condition. Saying "expects those arguments to have been settled a decade ago" ignores that little in HTTP endpoints is settled, and building brittle software around these assumptions is the problem.