Problem
Raw provider responses or server details can leak account data and cause unsafe retry decisions.
Objective
Deliver a production-quality improvement to client error boundary and mutation error handling that creates measurable value for correctness, security, reliability, performance, or maintainability.
Implementation scope
- Map errors to stable safe codes and retryability; redact addresses/tokens where appropriate; retain protected correlation data only for diagnostics.
Acceptance criteria
- No secret or raw provider payload reaches user-facing content; retry actions match the normalized error policy.
Required validation
- Malformed-error, redaction, retryability, and correlation tests.
- Existing tests and CI remain passing.
- Add regression coverage for the original failure mode.
- Do not weaken, delete, or skip unrelated tests to obtain a green build.
PR quality bar
- Keep the PR focused and explain design tradeoffs, compatibility impact, and test evidence.
- Avoid typo-only, documentation-only, cosmetic-only, or unrelated refactor submissions.
Out of scope
- Broad rewrites not required by the acceptance criteria.
- Changes to unrelated services, contracts, or user flows.
Problem
Raw provider responses or server details can leak account data and cause unsafe retry decisions.
Objective
Deliver a production-quality improvement to client error boundary and mutation error handling that creates measurable value for correctness, security, reliability, performance, or maintainability.
Implementation scope
Acceptance criteria
Required validation
PR quality bar
Out of scope