docs: outputs: standard-output: add otlp_json and otlp_json_pretty format values

[eschabell]

• add otlp_json and otlp_json_pretty to the format parameter

This is a code change with no corresponding doc PR.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Documentation
  • Updated documentation for the standard-output plugin's format configuration parameter to reflect support for two new output formats: otlp_json and otlp_json_pretty. Default format remains unchanged.

[coderabbitai]

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

Documentation update to the standard-output plugin adding two new supported output formats (otlp_json and otlp_json_pretty) to the format configuration parameter description.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Documentation Update pipeline/outputs/standard-output.md	Added otlp_json and otlp_json_pretty to the list of supported format configuration options.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes

Suggested labels

5.0

Suggested reviewers

• patrick-stephens

Poem

📋 Two formats hop into the light,
otlp_json shines so bright,
Pretty output joins the fray,
Documentation saves the day! 🐰✨

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3

✅ 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 clearly and specifically describes the documentation update, accurately summarizing the main change of adding two new format values to the standard-output plugin documentation.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

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.}

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)

pipeline/outputs/standard-output.md (1)

13-13: Consider adding usage examples for the new OTLP formats.

While not essential, adding example output for otlp_json and otlp_json_pretty formats would help users understand the OTLP JSON structure. This would be particularly valuable since OTLP has a specific schema that differs from the standard JSON formats.

📝 Example section that could be added

### OTLP JSON format example

```shell
fluent-bit -i cpu -o stdout -p format=otlp_json_pretty

This outputs data in OpenTelemetry Protocol JSON format with pretty-printing for readability.

</details>

<details>
<summary>🤖 Prompt for AI Agents</summary>

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In @pipeline/outputs/standard-output.md at line 13, Add a short "OTLP JSON
format example" subsection to the documentation next to the format table entry
showing how to invoke the stdout output with format=otlp_json and
format=otlp_json_pretty and include a small representative OTLP JSON payload
(one compact and one pretty-printed example) so users can see the schema
differences; place this new subsection near the format description and
reference the otlp_json and otlp_json_pretty values so readers can run the
sample command and compare compact vs pretty output.

</details>

</blockquote></details>

</blockquote></details>

<details>
<summary>🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents</summary>

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

Inline comments:
In @pipeline/outputs/standard-output.md:

• Line 13: Update the supported formats list for the stdout plugin by removing
  otlp_json and otlp_json_pretty from the format description (the line
  listing supported formats including msgpack, json, json_lines,
  json_stream, otlp_json, and otlp_json_pretty), leaving only msgpack,
  json, json_lines, and json_stream; keep the default value as msgpack
  and, if necessary, add a brief note that OTLP JSON should be produced via the
  OpenTelemetry/OTLP output plugin rather than the stdout plugin.

---

Nitpick comments:
In @pipeline/outputs/standard-output.md:

• Line 13: Add a short "OTLP JSON format example" subsection to the
  documentation next to the format table entry showing how to invoke the stdout
  output with format=otlp_json and format=otlp_json_pretty and include a small
  representative OTLP JSON payload (one compact and one pretty-printed example) so
  users can see the schema differences; place this new subsection near the
  format description and reference the otlp_json and otlp_json_pretty values
  so readers can run the sample command and compare compact vs pretty output.

</details>

<details>
<summary>🪄 Autofix (Beta)</summary>

Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:

- [ ] <!-- {"checkboxId": "4b0d0e0a-96d7-4f10-b296-3a18ea78f0b9"} --> Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- [ ] <!-- {"checkboxId": "ff5b1114-7d8c-49e6-8ac1-43f82af23a33"} --> Create a new PR with the fixes

</details>

---

<details>
<summary>ℹ️ Review info</summary>

<details>
<summary>⚙️ Run configuration</summary>

**Configuration used**: defaults

**Review profile**: CHILL

**Plan**: Pro

**Run ID**: `a7ecd076-5b95-4dc9-8303-6b0f5cdc8851`

</details>

<details>
<summary>📥 Commits</summary>

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between d6f49c51efef08091f9ceac7ed7fdb1c00de7b9b and 53651c48821280fdaca9b03dd67411b35683b44c.

</details>

<details>
<summary>📒 Files selected for processing (1)</summary>

* `pipeline/outputs/standard-output.md`

</details>

</details>

<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by CodeRabbit for review status -->

[eschabell]

@patrick-stephens ready for review!

[patrick-stephens]

Yeah this is the kind of thing it would be nice to have an automated check for in CI, i.e. if we add new options it flags them as missing.