loud-errors

name

loud-errors

description

Use when you spot a swallowed, vague, or context-losing error — an empty catch, a bare `except: pass`, `catch (e) { console.log(e) }` that then continues, `throw new Error("something went wrong")`, an error logged then ignored, or a caught exception that drops its cause. Makes failures loud and specific: each error says what operation failed, with which inputs, and what the caller should do — and stops being silently swallowed. Use when reviewing AI-generated code (agents swallow errors to make the happy path 'work'), when debugging a failure that left no useful trace, or before shipping a path that can fail.

Loud Errors

The failure mode this fixes

The worst error is the one you can't see. Code that swallows failures — catch {}, except: pass, an error logged at debug and then execution continues as if nothing happened — turns a clean crash into a silent corruption that surfaces hours later, somewhere else, with no trace back to the cause. The second-worst is the error that is loud but says nothing: throw new Error("something went wrong") tells the on-call engineer at 3am exactly nothing.

Agents are especially prone to both. They're optimizing for "make the happy path run," so they wrap risky calls in a try that quietly eats the failure, or they emit a generic message to satisfy a linter. The result is code that looks defensive and is actually blind.

This skill does the opposite of defensive-by-swallowing: it makes failures loud (they stop the wrong thing from continuing) and specific (they carry enough context to diagnose without a debugger).

When to Use This Skill

• You see an empty or near-empty catch: catch (e) {}, except: pass, catch { return null }, rescue nil
• An error is logged and then execution continues as if it succeeded
• A thrown/raised error is generic: "something went wrong", "error", "failed", a bare re-throw with no context
• A caught exception is replaced by a new one that drops the original cause
• You're reviewing AI-generated code and want to find where failures will be invisible
• A real incident left no useful trace and you're hunting for where the signal got eaten

Don't use when: the swallow is deliberate and correct — a genuinely optional operation (best-effort cache warm, telemetry that must never break the request), a documented retry/fallback, or a control-flow exception in a language that uses them idiomatically. In those cases the rule is not "make it loud," it's "make the intent to swallow explicit" (see step 4). Don't turn an intentional fallback into a crash.

Instructions

1. Find where failures disappear

Scan the target scope for the swallow patterns:

• Empty / nullifying catches — catch {}, except: pass, catch { return null }, .catch(() => {})
• Log-and-continue — the error is logged but the function proceeds as if it succeeded, returning a default or partial result
• Swallowed at the boundary — a top-level handler that catches everything and returns 200 OK / a generic page
• Cause-dropping — catch (e) { throw new Error("failed") } that discards e
• Vague throws — messages with no operation, no inputs, no actionable next step

2. Decide the right response for each (don't reflexively re-throw)

For each swallowed failure, classify the intended behavior:

• Must fail — the operation can't meaningfully continue → let it propagate, or throw with context. Most swallows are secretly this.
• Must fail here, differently — translate to a domain error the caller understands (PaymentDeclined, not a raw StripeError), but keep the original as the cause (throw new X(..., { cause: e }), raise X from e).
• Genuinely optional — the failure truly doesn't affect the result → keep swallowing, but make it explicit (step 4).

3. Make the message specific and actionable

A good error answers three questions without a debugger:

• What operation failed? ("charging card", not "error")
• With what inputs / identifiers? (the order id, the user id, the file path — never secrets, tokens, raw PII)
• What should happen next? (is it retryable? a bad input? a bug?)

Bad: throw new Error("failed") Good: throw new Error(\charge failed for order ${orderId}: gateway rejected (retryable)`, { cause: err })`

Preserve the original cause every time you wrap. A new error that drops the stack trace is just a different way of swallowing.

Report once, at the boundary that owns the response. Intermediate layers add context by wrapping with cause — they don't log. A failure that appears five times in the logs as it bubbles up is noise the on-call engineer has to dedupe by hand; loud means visible once with full context, not echoed at every layer.

4. Make any intentional swallow explicit

If a failure really should be ignored, it must say so on purpose — so the next reader (and the next agent) knows it's a decision, not an accident:

• Catch the specific type you mean to ignore, not the catch-all
• Leave a one-line "why" (// best-effort; a cold cache is fine)
• Still record it where it can be seen (debug log / metric), just don't fail the caller

5. Fail fast at the boundary

Validate and reject bad inputs at the edge (where the request, file, or message enters) — the closer the error surfaces to its cause, the cheaper it is to diagnose.

6. Verify the failure is now visible

For at least the highest-risk path, confirm the new behavior: trigger (or reason through) the failure and check that it surfaces with its context — a test that asserts the error is thrown with the right message/cause is the proof. If conventions are recorded in CONTEXT.md (error-handling style: exceptions vs result types vs error returns), match them rather than imposing a new pattern.

Output format

SWALLOWED / VAGUE FAILURES
  - <location> @ <file:line> — pattern: <empty catch / log-and-continue / cause-dropped / vague throw>
    intended: <must-fail | translate-with-cause | genuinely-optional>
    fix: <propagate | specific message + cause | explicit intentional swallow>

PROPOSED MESSAGES (before -> after)
  - "failed"  ->  "charge failed for order {orderId}: gateway rejected (retryable)"

INTENTIONAL SWALLOWS (kept, now explicit)
  - <location> — why it's safe to ignore: <reason>

PROOF
  <a test asserting the error surfaces with its context, or the path you verified>

Anti-Patterns

Anti-Pattern	Why it defeats the skill
catch (e) {} / except: pass	The failure becomes invisible; corruption surfaces later, elsewhere, untraceable.
Catch-all that swallows everything	You meant to ignore one thing and silenced a hundred — including the bug you'll spend a day hunting.
throw new Error("failed")	Loud but useless. No operation, no input, no next step — the on-call engineer learns nothing.
Wrapping that drops the cause	A new error with no cause/original stack is just swallowing with extra steps.
Logging secrets/PII into the message	An error you can't paste into a ticket is a new problem, not a fix. Identifiers, never secrets.
Making an intentional fallback crash	Best-effort work (cache, telemetry) must not fail the request. Make the swallow explicit, don't remove it.
Catch-log-rethrow at every layer	The same failure shows up five times in the logs. Wrap with cause as it bubbles; log once, at the boundary.

Mental Model

A swallowed error is a bug you've agreed not to find out about. Make failures loud enough to notice and specific enough to fix — and if you really must ignore one, say so on purpose.