For browser monitor there is plenty of details available, for simple http monitors there are informations you see there. I don’t see there any option to drill down to PurePaths as well. You should be able to find requests from synthetic location using client IP (http monitors is executed on ActiveGate inside your architecture so IP address is known, it can be tracked as request attribute as well for searching and filtering purposes) in service that was responsible for WebServer unavailability.
There will be no user session for http monitor. But you can find purepaths (server side) related to them. If you know AG ip, you can find by it proper requests and you will know what happened.
But that host must have Oneagent installed. In our case that host is not having Oneagent. So no deep visibility as what went wrong and even "Assign HTTP monitor to web application" wont work I believe. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Without one agent you can only pass some header to request and find option to log those requests with special header to some extra log file. In such case you can push logs somewhere and do alerting based on this but this is really ugly workaround
If you will run monitor directly to each WebServerwith skipping load balancer, each http monitor will inform you about responses of each of them. Failing one of http monitor will mean that this particular WebServeris down
If we do it the way of hitting the servers specifically, the only additional information that we can provide is going to be what server is having an issues through the http monitor. So if you have server1 and server2, and server1:443/webapp fails all its checks and server2:443/webapp succeeds all its checks, then you know the issue is going on which server, or both. Other than that, finding out in depth metrics to correlate with a synthetic will require a oneagent. (I.e. services, root cause) Getting that sort of information would also be aided by having the synthetic be a browser monitor, so you could coordinate purepath data from the front end user (the synthetic) with back end performance.
@Akshay S. I would recommend using the browser monitor instead of the HTTP monitor as it will provide you with a better in depth analysis of your synthetic test, much like the pure path does. I have answered your other question and provided you an explanation between the 3 monitoring options. I will also include a screen shot on them with a water fall analysis so you can see the benefit of Browser monitors vs HTTP monitors.