incident.io

What do you like best about the product?

The UI is easy to use and very intuitive, which makes the onboarding process simple. There are also lots of native integrations available right out of the box.

What do you dislike about the product?

Workflow configuration feels quite limited right now. I’d like to see more customizable features added, such as the ability to build a string using variables.

What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?

It’s much easier to know who to reach out to and who to escalate to when there’s an issue, so I no longer have to maintain a huge spreadsheet of contacts. The AI features used in meetings also help speed up the documentation process, both during the incident and afterward.

What do you like best about the product?

Easy integration with current tools, good support during the project phase and after, easy daily operation on the UI and with slack integration.

What do you dislike about the product?

The reporting tool (Insights) that is provided doesn't offer much customization.

What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?

A centralized way to handle with incidents and tracking the post-incident actions. The capacity to keep anyone informed about what is happening related to incidents across the company. Just few months after the implementation of the tool we saw a huge improvement of our Incident Management process.

What do you like best about the product?

The product is very intuitive and easy to use. Their support team is always helpful and when we need some new feature they are eager to understand our needs and at some point we know it'll be delivered.

The AI is very helpful for handling incidents on a daily basis and the performance is usually great. Something that never tires to amaze me is how their engineering team is aware of when we have problems before we even contact them (we receive notifications from them saying they have noticed we have had problems and they're on the fix beforehand).

The pricing is fair although the new AI features will probably be more pricy than we'd want.

For integrations I think the team has a lot of improvements to make, specially with SalesForce where the integration is right now basic and doesn't allow us to bring that many customizations.

What do you dislike about the product?

The product wasn't created thinking in organizations that require regional customizations. Also, the dependency on some external services (for Insights and escalation voice calls for example) are a downside. I trust IncidentIO, and not their partners.

What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?

IncidentIO helps us provide a clear incident response process in our company.

What do you like best about the product?

Easy to use, with a strong post-incident process and sensible defaults. The Slack integration provides a streamlined, intuitive workflow. The catalog also makes it easy to automate flows, and the AI agent helps me get what I need done without having to hunt for the right command.

It’s genuinely fun to use.

What do you dislike about the product?

Nothing major comes to mind. The pricing was a bit high, but it was worth every penny. Our sales rep was very flexible and worked with us to reach the price point we were targeting.

What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?

Our incident management process used to be a mess, with a mix of ticket automations, a sub-par on-call solution, and far too many manual steps. incident.io is helping us move toward a more efficient, streamlined, and automated incident response.

On top of that, the clear post-incident process helps us learn from what happened and be more reliable going forward.

What do you like best about the product?

The automated incident lifecycle is the standout. The moment an alert fires, a dedicated Slack channel spins up with severity, incident manager, and reporter already assigned, and the status timeline (Investigating → Fixing → Documenting → Closed) updates itself as the team works the problem. Post-mortems and follow-up tracking are built into the same flow, and the automated nudges for overdue follow-ups have noticeably cut down on action items that used to quietly disappear after an incident closed. On-call scheduling and escalation paths are flexible enough to model our actual team structure, and moving a team over from our old alerting setup took minutes rather than a project.

The Slack integration in particular feels native rather than bolted on — incidents, alerts, escalations, and even AI-driven investigation summaries all show up directly in-channel, so nobody has to context-switch to a separate app mid-incident. We've also wired it into our observability stack, and it correlates incidents against historical data and recent code changes with very little manual setup. It's held up reliably even under long, multi-hour, customer-impacting incidents, and it's never been the thing that broke or slowed us down while we were already firefighting.

We haven't run a formal ROI study, but the value shows up clearly in what stopped happening: fewer forgotten follow-ups, less time spent reconstructing "what happened and when" during a post-mortem, and far less manual bookkeeping overall. For a team our size, that time saved has made it an easy tool to justify keeping.

What do you dislike about the product?

Rollout of newer capabilities (we're piloting the AI investigation features) has been env-by-env rather than everything at once, so early trials were scoped to a single production environment before expanding further. We also hit a real constraint connecting only one Grafana instance at a time, which meant some environments had metrics available but not full dashboard context. None of this touches the core incident workflow, but it's worth planning around if you're rolling out across a multi-environment setup like ours.

What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?

Before this, incident response lived across a mix of manual Slack channel creation, Opsgenie for alerting, and a lot of tribal knowledge about who to page and how to write up what happened afterward. That meant real toil during incidents (someone had to remember to create the channel, tag the right people, track status) and even more toil after (post-mortems and follow-ups that depended on someone's memory and discipline to actually get written and closed out).

incident.io took that manual overhead off our plate. Alerts now route straight into a structured incident with a channel, severity, and incident manager assigned automatically, so responders can focus on the actual problem instead of the process around it. The follow-up nudges have been the quieter but bigger win: action items that used to fall through the cracks after an incident closed now get chased automatically, which has genuinely improved our follow-through on fixing root causes rather than just resolving symptoms. And because the whole timeline is captured as it happens, writing post-mortems is mostly assembly rather than reconstruction from memory.

Net effect: less time spent on incident bookkeeping, better on-call coverage across teams, and a much more reliable trail from "something broke" to "here's what we changed so it doesn't happen again."