Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add tmj-90/gaffer --skill idempotency-and-retriesgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/tmj-90/gafferWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/tmj-90/gaffer/idempotency-and-retries)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/tmj-90/gaffer/idempotency-and-retries"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tmj-90/gaffer/idempotency-and-retries/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/tmj-90/gaffer/idempotency-and-retries"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tmj-90/gaffer/idempotency-and-retries.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00093 | $0.01601 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00037 | $0.00640 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00019 | $0.00320 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00160 |
Grade A, and why
idempotency-and-retries scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 16d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 97 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Make operations idempotent and retries safe
Networks deliver at least once or not at all. Exactly-once effect comes only from an idempotent operation plus retries. The hard part is not the happy path; it is two copies of the same request arriving at once, and a crash between "did it" and "wrote it down". Sources: IETF draft-ietf-httpapi-idempotency-key-header; Stripe's idempotency design (Brandur Leach, "Implementing Stripe-like idempotency keys in Postgres"); AWS Builders' Library "Timeouts, retries, and backoff with jitter".
Steps
- Classify the operation. Naturally idempotent (PUT that sets state, DELETE),
idempotent with a key (create order, send email, charge card), or deliberately
non-idempotent (say why). Call
search_lorefor the repo's key header and retry policy. - Choose the key. API creates: client-supplied
Idempotency-Keyheader (a string, UUID recommended). Webhooks and queue consumers: the event/message id. Internal jobs: a natural key (order id + step). Scope it to the caller: the store key is(caller, key)so two tenants cannot collide. - Store the outcome with a fingerprint. A table with a UNIQUE constraint on
(caller, key)holding a request fingerprint (hash of method, path and canonical body), a status (in_progress,completed), the stored response (status + body), andlocked_until/created_at. Replay rules (IETF draft semantics):- key missing on an endpoint that requires it →
400; - same key, different fingerprint →
422, never a silent success; - same key while the first is still
in_progress→409(client retries later); - same key, completed → return the stored response byte-for-byte, including stored
errors from after execution began (Stripe stores
500s too). Validation errors raised before execution are not stored, so a corrected retry works.
- key missing on an endpoint that requires it →
- Claim the key atomically, never check-then-insert.
INSERT … ON CONFLICT DO NOTHING RETURNING(Postgres) /INSERT IGNORE+ affected-rows (MySQL) / a unique index violation you catch. Whoever inserts owns the execution; everyone else reads the row. ASELECTfollowed byINSERTis a race that double-executes under load. - Make local effects atomic with the record. When the effect is a database write,
do it in the same transaction that sets
completedand stores the response. - Bracket external effects with recovery points. For a charge, email or third-party
call you cannot enlist in the transaction: commit
in_progresswith the downstream idempotency key first, call out passing that key, then commitcompleted. A crash leavesin_progresspast itslocked_until; a reconciler (or the next retry) resumes by re-calling the dependency with the same downstream key, which collapses to one effect. Taking over a stalein_progressrow is a time lease, so fence it: the takeover bumps an attempt counter, and the finalcompletedwrite is conditional on it (… WHERE key = ? AND attempt = ?, 0 rows → roll back and stop), so a paused original holder cannot overwrite the recovered result (theconcurrency-and-asyncskill, step 5). Emit follow-on messages through a transactional outbox, not directly. - Retry only what is safe, at one layer. Retry idempotent or keyed calls on
transient failures only: timeouts, connection resets,
502/503/504, and429/503honouringRetry-After. Never retry other 4xx. Backoff with full jitter:sleep = random(0, min(cap, base * 2^attempt)); cap attempts and set a total deadline. Retry at a single layer of the stack (3 retries at each of 5 layers is 243× load) and bound retries with a retry budget or token bucket so an outage is not amplified. Timeouts come from measured latency (e.g. above p99.9), never infinite. - Expire keys deliberately. Keep records at least as long as clients retry (Stripe:
24 h), sweep them with a job (the
scheduled-jobsskill), and document the window in the API contract (theopenapi-contractskill).
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 16d ago Changed · +33 lines 0d29a05d7c35
- 19d ago First seen · 64 lines · 93 tokens per session scan A 772616c5ba60
idempotency-and-retries is a skill published in the GitHub repository tmj-90/gaffer (2 stars, last pushed 17d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 93 tokens to every session and 1,601 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-09-28.
Other skills, from other repositories
bulwark-brainstorm
Role-based brainstorming with dual modes: --scoped (sequential Task tool, 5 roles) and --exploratory (Agent Teams peer debate, 4 roles). Use for feasibility assessment and idea validation.
plan-creation
Create structured implementation plans via a 4-role scrum team (Product Owner, Architect, Eng/Delivery Lead, QA/Critic) with optional Agent Teams peer debate mode.
anthropic-validator
Validates Claude Code assets (skills, hooks, agents, commands, MCP servers, plugins) against official Anthropic standards. Fetches latest docs dynamically and produces structured validation reports.
create-subagent
Generates single-purpose Claude Code sub-agents for use via the Task tool. Use when creating dedicated sub-agents, scaffolding agent definitions, or generating agents with diagnostics and permissions setup.
test-audit
Audit test suites for T1-T4 violations using AST analysis, mock detection, and multi-stage synthesis. Invoke when user asks to audit tests, check test quality, find mock violations, review test effectiveness, or inspect test suites for over-mocking. Triggers automatic rewrites when quality gates fail.
code-review
Comprehensive code review with distinct aspect based sections. Use when reviewing code, checking for security issues, finding type safety problems, auditing code quality, or when user asks to review code, PRs or changes. Three-phase workflow runs static tools, LLM judgment, and writes diagnostic log.