Exa Reliability PatternsBLOCK
Model-agnostic agent-skills platform with a harness-free canonical layer, verified adapters, and the ccpi package manager. Explore at tonsofskills.com.
Overview
Model-agnostic agent-skills platform with a harness-free canonical layer, verified adapters, and the ccpi package manager. Explore at tonsofskills.com.
4f83675ca38aOBSERVED · 2026-10-08Host compatibility
What the documentation claims. We have not run a compatibility test.
| Host | Status | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| claude-code | mentioned |
What it tells the agent
The instruction file, verbatim from the audited commit — this is the text the model reads, and the surface the audit's instruction layer examines. Quoted here so you can judge it without cloning anything.
--- name: exa-reliability-patterns description: >- Design bounded Exa retries, deadlines, partial-result behavior, and tested fallbacks by endpoint and failure class. Use when operating or reviewing this Exa boundary. Trigger with "Exa reliability patterns", "review Exa reliability patterns", or "fix Exa reliability patterns". allowed-tools: Read,Glob,Grep,Write,Edit argument-hint: "<endpoint> <deadline> <fallback-policy>" version: 1.12.0 license: MIT author: Jeremy Longshore <[email protected]> tags: [saas, exa] model: inherit effort: high compatibility: "Designed for Claude Code; live Exa work requires network access" --- # Exa Reliability and Retry Design ## Overview Design bounded Exa retries, deadlines, partial-result behavior, and tested fallbacks by endpoint and failure class. Treat credentials, queries, retrieved content, generated output, spend, and destructive state as separately governed boundaries. ## Prerequisites - The target repository, environment, Exa team, product surface, and accountable owner. - The workload's data classification, latency and freshness promise, cost ceiling, and retention policy. - Current first-party documentation plus credentials only for a narrowly approved live check. ## Current Contract Retryability depends on status and operation. Invalid 400, auth, policy, and billing failures require repair; 429 honors Retry-After; documented transient server or overload failures can use capped jitter. Asynchronous creates and destructive calls require identity and state checks before replay. ## Authentication For normal REST work, inject `EXA_API_KEY` from an approved server-side secret manager and send it only as `Authorization: Bearer` to the configured first-party Exa API host. Team Management service keys, hosted MCP OAuth or enterprise managed authorization, and payment-protocol calls are separate trust models. Never print, commit, place in a URL, or expose a credential to an untrusted client. ## Instructions 1. Classify each operation as read, create, update, trigger, cancel, stop, or delete. 2. Assign an end-to-end deadline and bounded attempt budget per operation. 3. Retry only documented transient classes and preserve request or resource IDs. 4. Define partial Contents behavior and freshness fallback explicitly. 5. Choose a tested degrade path that preserves source attribution and policy. 6. Exercise timeout, duplicate delivery, stale cache, overload, and recovery in tests. ## Tool Discipline Use Read, Glob, and Grep to inspect repository code, configuration, fixtures, and evidence. Use Write and Edit only for approved implementation or documentation changes. Do not call Exa, run paid research, create or alter a Monitor, Webset, Agent run, Batch, team, member, API key, budget, webhook, or deployment merely because this skill was invoked. ## Approval Boundaries Require an accountable owner before live queries involving sensitive intent, production credentials, spend or rate-limit changes, forced live crawling, generated summaries, external delivery, deployment, member or key changes, schedule creation, or destructive cancellation, stopping, deletion, or revocation. Read-only repository inspection and synthetic offline validation do not authorize live vendor actions. ## Failure Modes - Retrying a create after an ambiguous timeout can duplicate paid work. - Serving cache-only content can violate a freshness promise unless disclosed. - A fallback search provider changes quality, data handling, and cost boundaries. ## Output Return the operation scope, environment, team and product surface, authorization class, contract and policy decisions, deterministic validation results, content-free identifiers, status and cost counts, risks, cleanup or rollback state, and a concise pass or fail receipt. Exclude credentials, raw queries, prompts, presigned URLs, retrieved content, generated output, and customer-derived data unless separately approved. ## Example - Retry a 503 read with capped jitter, but reconcile an Agent run ID before deciding whether to submit another run. - Finish with request or resource IDs, assertion counts, cost and terminal state, rollback or deletion status, and the decision owner; never reproduce secrets or retrieved content. ## Validation Rerun the smallest relevant deterministic test, compare actual behavior with the requested outcome and current first-party contract, verify sensitive fields are absent from evidence, and confirm deadlines, terminal state, downstream retention, and rollback before reporting success. ## References Review the dated first-party evidence map before relying on any endpoint, parameter, search type, price, limit, beta, compliance, identity, retry, or lifecycle claim. - [Current first-party evidence map](references/official-docs.md)
Trust audit
BLOCKgrade D · trust 69/100 Do not install this without reading the findings. The audit found something that could harm you or your machine.
| Layer | What it checks | Result |
|---|---|---|
| L0 | Provenance & inventory | PASS |
| L1 | Static analysis of the code | PASS |
| L2 | Instruction surface (what it tells the agent) | FAIL |
| L3 | Class-specific surface | PASS |
| L4 | Behavioural (sandbox) | SKIPPED |
What the source does
- Filesystem
- none-observed
- Network
- none-observed
- Shell
- none-observed
- Dependencies
- pinned
- Secrets in source
- none-found
Findings (1)
For normal REST work, inject `EXA_API_KEY` from an approved server-side secret manager and send it only as `Authorization: Bearer` to the configured first-party Exa API host. Team Management service k
Gates applied: critical_finding, no_behavioural_pass, undeclared_transfer.
4f83675ca38afull audit observations/trust-audit/skill/jeremylongshore__exa-reliability-patterns.json · Report an issue / request a re-scanAudit history
Every audit this skill has had.
| Date | Source | Verdict | Grade | Score | Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-08 | 4f83675ca38a | BLOCK | D | 69 | first audit |
Questions
What does the Exa Reliability Patterns skill do?
Model-agnostic agent-skills platform with a harness-free canonical layer, verified adapters, and the ccpi package manager. Explore at tonsofskills.com.
Is Exa Reliability Patterns safe to install?
No — not without reading the findings first. The audit graded it D (69/100) and found 1 critical or high issue in the source. Each one is listed on this page with the file and line it is on.
What can Exa Reliability Patterns access on my machine?
The audit observed no filesystem, network or shell use at all in its source.
Which assistants does Exa Reliability Patterns work with?
Its documentation mentions claude-code. That is what the text claims, not a compatibility test we ran.
How current is this page?
The grade is for one exact copy of the source (4f83675ca38a), read on 2026-10-08. The repository is watched, and a new audit runs when it changes — this is the first audit.