Use when designing domain error handling. Keywords: domain error, error categorization, recovery strategy, retry, fallback, domain error hierarchy, user-facing vs internal errors, error code design, circuit breaker, graceful degradation, resilience, error context, backoff, retry with backoff, error recovery, transient vs permanent error, 领域错误, 错误分类, 恢复策略, 重试, 熔断器, 优雅降级
69
62%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/m13-domain-error/SKILL.mdLayer 2: Design Choices
Who needs to handle this error, and how should they recover?
Before designing error types:
| Error Type | Audience | Recovery | Example |
|---|---|---|---|
| User-facing | End users | Guide action | InvalidEmail, NotFound |
| Internal | Developers | Debug info | DatabaseError, ParseError |
| System | Ops/SRE | Monitor/alert | ConnectionTimeout, RateLimited |
| Transient | Automation | Retry | NetworkError, ServiceUnavailable |
| Permanent | Human | Investigate | ConfigInvalid, DataCorrupted |
Before designing error types:
Who sees this error?
Can we recover?
What context is needed?
To domain constraints (Layer 3):
"How should I handle payment failures?"
↑ Ask: What are the business rules for retries?
↑ Check: domain-fintech (transaction requirements)
↑ Check: SLA (availability requirements)| Question | Trace To | Ask |
|---|---|---|
| Retry policy | domain-* | What's acceptable latency for retry? |
| User experience | domain-* | What message should users see? |
| Compliance | domain-* | What must be logged for audit? |
To implementation (Layer 1):
"Need typed errors"
↓ m06-error-handling: thiserror for library
↓ m04-zero-cost: Error enum design
"Need error context"
↓ m06-error-handling: anyhow::Context
↓ Logging: tracing with fields
"Need retry logic"
↓ m07-concurrency: async retry patterns
↓ Crates: tokio-retry, backoff| Recovery Pattern | When | Implementation |
|---|---|---|
| Retry | Transient failures | exponential backoff |
| Fallback | Degraded mode | cached/default value |
| Circuit Breaker | Cascading failures | failsafe-rs |
| Timeout | Slow operations | tokio::time::timeout |
| Bulkhead | Isolation | separate thread pools |
#[derive(thiserror::Error, Debug)]
pub enum AppError {
// User-facing
#[error("Invalid input: {0}")]
Validation(String),
// Transient (retryable)
#[error("Service temporarily unavailable")]
ServiceUnavailable(#[source] reqwest::Error),
// Internal (log details, show generic)
#[error("Internal error")]
Internal(#[source] anyhow::Error),
}
impl AppError {
pub fn is_retryable(&self) -> bool {
matches!(self, Self::ServiceUnavailable(_))
}
}use tokio_retry::{Retry, strategy::ExponentialBackoff};
async fn with_retry<F, T, E>(f: F) -> Result<T, E>
where
F: Fn() -> impl Future<Output = Result<T, E>>,
E: std::fmt::Debug,
{
let strategy = ExponentialBackoff::from_millis(100)
.max_delay(Duration::from_secs(10))
.take(5);
Retry::spawn(strategy, || f()).await
}| Mistake | Why Wrong | Better |
|---|---|---|
| Same error for all | No actionability | Categorize by audience |
| Retry everything | Wasted resources | Only transient errors |
| Infinite retry | DoS self | Max attempts + backoff |
| Expose internal errors | Security risk | User-friendly messages |
| No context | Hard to debug | .context() everywhere |
| Anti-Pattern | Why Bad | Better |
|---|---|---|
| String errors | No structure | thiserror types |
| panic! for recoverable | Bad UX | Result with context |
| Ignore errors | Silent failures | Log or propagate |
| Box<dyn Error> everywhere | Lost type info | thiserror |
| Error in happy path | Performance | Early validation |
| When | See |
|---|---|
| Error handling basics | m06-error-handling |
| Retry implementation | m07-concurrency |
| Domain modeling | m09-domain |
| User-facing APIs | domain-* |
1f4becd
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.