error-handling-patterns

Build resilient applications with robust error handling strategies that gracefully handle failures and provide excellent debugging experiences.

Quality

44%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills-claude/skills/error-handling-patterns/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is error-handling-patterns in rmyndharis/antigravity-skills

Quality

Content

43%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is concise and well-structured with a useful trigger list, but the Instructions are generic boilerplate offering no concrete, executable error-handling guidance, and the sole referenced resource file is missing from the bundle. Workflow sequencing and validation are absent.

Suggestions

Add concrete, executable guidance — e.g. a retry/backoff code snippet, a circuit-breaker pattern example, and a structured-error template — instead of the generic 'apply best practices' bullet.

Create the missing `resources/implementation-playbook.md` (or remove the dangling reference) so the one-level-deep reference actually resolves.

Replace the abstract Instructions with a sequenced workflow with an explicit validation checkpoint (e.g. '1. Identify failure modes; 2. Apply pattern; 3. Verify with a fault-injection test; 4. Confirm error context is logged').

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean with tight sectioned bullet lists and no over-explanation of concepts Claude already knows; it is not a 5 because the opening line repeats the frontmatter description verbatim and the 'Do not use' bullets are generic boilerplate that could be trimmed.	4 / 5
Actionability	The Instructions are abstract process boilerplate ('Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes', 'Provide actionable steps and verification') with no concrete code, commands, or specific pattern guidance, matching anchor 2's 'minimal concrete guidance; high-level hints'; it is above 1 because named patterns (retry, circuit breaker) and a resource pointer appear, but no executable steps are given.	2 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The four Instructions bullets form only a rough generic sequence (clarify -> apply -> provide -> open resource) with poorly defined steps and no real validation checkpoint despite the abstract 'validate outcomes' phrase, matching anchor 2; it is not a 3 because no concrete sequenced workflow with checkpoints is actually present.	2 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Sections are well-organized (Use when / Do not use / Instructions / Resources) and the single reference is one level deep and clearly signaled, but the referenced file `resources/implementation-playbook.md` does not exist, breaking navigation and capping the score at anchor 3 rather than 4.	3 / 5
	Total	11 / 20 Passed

Description

45%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description states a clear 'what' with some natural trigger keywords but lacks any explicit 'Use when' guidance and relies on generic action language, capping completeness and specificity. It is distinguishable but carries moderate overlap risk given error handling is a cross-cutting domain.

Suggestions

Append an explicit 'Use when...' clause with concrete triggers (e.g. 'Use when implementing retry/circuit-breaker patterns, handling exceptions, or debugging production failures') to lift completeness and trigger-term quality.

Replace generic verbs ('gracefully handle failures', 'provide excellent debugging experiences') with specific concrete actions like 'wrap flaky calls in retry/backoff, add circuit breakers, and structure errors with context for debugging'.

Add common synonyms users actually say ('exceptions', 'crash', 'reliability', 'retry') to broaden trigger coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the domain ('robust error handling strategies', 'resilient applications') but the actions are minimal and generic ('gracefully handle failures', 'provide excellent debugging experiences'), with no specific patterns named; it does not reach the 1-2 concrete-actions bar of anchor 3 because the actions are abstract rather than concrete.	2 / 5
Completeness	It clearly answers 'what' ('Build resilient applications with robust error handling strategies...') but provides no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance; per the rubric guideline a missing explicit trigger caps completeness at 3, and it is not a 2 because the 'what' is clearly stated.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Natural keywords like 'error handling', 'failures', and 'debugging' appear, but common variations and synonyms users would say (e.g. 'retry', 'exceptions', 'crash', 'reliability') are missing, matching anchor 3's 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations'.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Error handling is a cross-cutting concern that overlaps with reliability, debugging, and async skills, so it 'could still overlap with similar skills' (anchor 3); it is not a 2 because 'error handling' names a more specific niche than the very-broad anchor-2 example.	3 / 5
	Total	11 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills
Path: plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills-claude/skills/error-handling-patterns/SKILL.md
Commit: 57c135b

Reviewed: 3 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

Is this your skill?

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.