error-handling

name	error-handling
description	Error handling strategy and decision framework. Use when designing error types, propagation patterns, or reviewing error handling. Pair with language-specific error-handling skill.

Error Handling

Errors are values. Handle them gracefully, not just check them.

When to Use

• Designing error strategy for a new package or service
• Deciding between sentinel errors, custom types, or wrapping
• Mapping domain errors to transport responses (HTTP, gRPC, CLI)
• Reviewing error handling in existing code

When NOT to Use

• Writing language-specific error code (use <lang>/error-handling skill)
• Simple scripts with no error propagation needs

Core Process

1. Identify error sources — What operations can fail? List them.
2. Classify each error — Use the decision framework below to choose error type.
3. Design propagation — How does each error flow up the call stack? Add context at each level.
4. Map at boundaries — Domain errors → transport responses at the outermost layer only.
5. Document contracts — Each package declares what errors it returns and when.
6. Verify — Walk the error path from origin to user-facing response. Is context preserved? Is the response correct?

Decision Framework

Ask in order:

1. Caller needs to programmatically distinguish this error?

   • Yes → sentinel error or custom error type
   • No → wrapped error with context string

2. Error is a static condition with no runtime data?

   • Yes → sentinel error constant/variable
   • No → custom error type with fields, or wrapped error

3. Error carries structured data the caller needs?

   • Yes → custom error type
   • No → wrapped error with context string

Error Categories

Category	When	Example
Sentinel errors	Well-known conditions, multiple callers branch on it	NotFound, AlreadyExists, Forbidden
Custom error types	Caller needs structured data (field, code, resource)	ValidationError, NotFoundError
Wrapped errors	Default — add context as you propagate up	"finding user %s: %w"
Multi-error	Operation fails in multiple independent ways	Config validation, batch processing

Propagation Rules

• Wrap with context — describe the operation that failed, not the function name
• Include identifiers — "finding user %s" not "finding user"
• Lowercase, no punctuation — error messages are fragments, not sentences
• Preserve the chain — callers must be able to inspect the original error
• One handler per error — either log OR return with context, never both

Boundary Mapping

Map domain errors to transport responses at the boundary only. Domain code stays transport-agnostic.

Domain Error	HTTP	gRPC	CLI Exit
NotFound	404	NOT_FOUND	3
Validation	400/422	INVALID_ARGUMENT	2
Conflict	409	ALREADY_EXISTS	1
Forbidden	403	PERMISSION_DENIED	4
Internal	500 (log, return generic)	INTERNAL	1

Common Rationalizations

Shortcut	Reality
"Just return the error"	Bare returns lose context. Callers can't diagnose without wrapping.
"Log it and return it"	Causes duplicate logging. Pick one: log OR return with context.
"Panic is simpler"	Panic crashes the process. Reserve for true programmer bugs only.
"String matching is fine"	Strings are fragile. Use typed/value error checking — strings break on rewording.

Red Flags

• Errors returned without any context added
• Same error logged at multiple levels (duplicate logging)
• String matching on error messages instead of type/value checks
• Panic used for expected failure conditions (not found, validation)
• Domain errors leaking transport details (HTTP status codes in service layer)
• No error documentation for package's public API

Verification

• Every error return is checked — no ignored errors
• Errors are wrapped with operation context at each level
• No log-and-return patterns (either log or return, not both)
• Domain errors mapped to transport responses at the boundary only
• Package error contracts documented (which errors, when, how to handle)