agentleFS
MicrosoftKnown publishermicrosoft/waza/.github/skills/error-recovery/SKILL.md

error-recovery

Skill1.5k starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub

Standard recovery patterns for all squad agents. When something fails, adapt — don't just report the failure.

16 other projects use a version of this.

Trending

Less talk lately.about the whole repository

Dec 2025: 0 mentionsJan 2026: 0 mentionsFeb 2026: 0 mentionsMar 2026: 6 mentionsApr 2026: 5 mentionsMay 2026: 5 mentionsJun 2026: 4 mentionsJul 2026: 7 mentionsAug 2026: 8 mentionsSep 2026: 1 mentionOct 2026: 11 mentionsNov 2026: 3 mentions
Dec 2025Jun 2026Nov 2026
Mentions a month of the microsoft/waza repository that our weekly crawl found. There is no adoption data for this file yet.

Most recently taken up by

Who's talking about microsoft/waza

The biggest 5 of 50 mentions linking to the repository that our crawl found. Each line is their own headline.

See all 50

Talked about on GitHub and Bluesky (50 times).

On GitHub · 48

43 more on GitHub

On Bluesky · 2

Used with

Projects with it also use architectural-proposals, ci-validation-gates and 9 more.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • Microsoft AzureSkill

    architectural-proposals

    How to write comprehensive architectural proposals that drive alignment before code is written

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • Microsoft AzureSkill

    ci-validation-gates

    Defensive CI/CD patterns: semver validation, token checks, retry logic, draft detection — earned from v0.8.22

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • +9 more from Azure

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

5 rules. 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 7 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 5

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Wait briefly, then retry (start at 2s, double each attempt)

    line 20
  2. Distinctive:

    Document which alternative was used and why

    line 36
  3. Distinctive:

    Read the full error output carefully

    line 47
  4. Distinctive:

    Example: After 3 failed build attempts → "Build fails on line 42 with null reference.

    line 68
  5. Distinctive:

    If non-critical, log the failure and continue

    line 78

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 7 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Error Recovery Patterns

Standard recovery patterns for all squad agents. When something fails, adapt — don't just report the failure.


1. Retry with Backoff

When: Transient failures — API timeouts, rate limits, network errors, temporary service unavailability.

Pattern:

  1. Wait briefly, then retry (start at 2s, double each attempt)
  2. Maximum 3 retries before escalating
  3. Log each attempt with the error received

Example: API call returns 429 Too Many Requests → wait 2s → retry → wait 4s → retry → wait 8s → retry → escalate if still failing.


2. Fallback Alternatives

When: Primary tool or approach fails and an alternative exists.

Pattern:

  1. Attempt primary approach
  2. On failure, identify alternative tool/method
  3. Try the alternative with the same intent
  4. Document which alternative was used and why

Example: Primary CLI tool fails → fall back to direct API call for the same operation.


3. Diagnose-and-Fix

When: Build failures, test failures, linting errors — structured errors with actionable output.

Pattern:

  1. Read the full error output carefully
  2. Identify the root cause from error messages
  3. Attempt a targeted fix
  4. Re-run to verify the fix
  5. Maximum 3 fix-retry cycles before escalating

Example: Build fails with a type error → check for missing import → add it → rebuild.


4. Escalate with Context

When: Recovery attempts have been exhausted, or the failure requires human judgment.

Pattern:

  1. Summarize what was attempted and what failed
  2. Include the exact error messages
  3. State what you believe the root cause is
  4. Suggest next steps or who might be able to help
  5. Hand off to the coordinator or the appropriate specialist

Example: After 3 failed build attempts → "Build fails on line 42 with null reference. Tried X, Y, Z. Likely a design issue in the Foo module. Recommend the code owner review."


5. Graceful Degradation

When: A non-critical step fails but the overall task can still deliver value.

Pattern:

  1. Determine if the failed step is critical to the task outcome
  2. If non-critical, log the failure and continue
  3. Deliver partial results with a clear note of what was skipped
  4. Offer to retry the skipped step separately

Example: Generating a report with 5 sections — section 3 data source is unavailable → produce the report with 4 sections, note that section 3 was skipped and why.


Applying These Patterns

Each agent should reference these patterns in their charter's ## Error Recovery section, tailored to their domain. The charter should list the agent's most common failure modes and map each to the appropriate pattern above.

Selection guide:

Failure TypePrimary PatternFallback Pattern
Network/API transientRetry with BackoffEscalate with Context
Tool/dependency missingFallback AlternativesEscalate with Context
Build/test errorDiagnose-and-FixEscalate with Context
Auth/permissionsRetry with BackoffEscalate with Context
Non-critical data missingGraceful Degradation—
Unknown/novel errorEscalate with Context—

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.