everything-claude-code/skills/agent-self-evaluation/examples/high-score-example.md

High-Score Example: Adding Retry Logic

Task

Add retry logic with exponential backoff to all HTTP requests in the API client. Max 3 retries, initial delay 1s, max delay 30s.

Agent Output

Summary

Added httpx.Retry transport to the shared ApiClient class. All HTTP methods (GET, POST, PUT, DELETE) now retry on 429, 5xx, and connection errors with exponential backoff. 42 tests pass. Single PR ready to merge.

Files Changed

• src/api_client.py — Added RetryTransport wrapper with httpx.Retry( total=3, backoff_factor=1.0, status_forcelist=[429, 500, 502, 503, 504] )
• tests/test_api_client.py — Added 8 tests: happy path, retry on 429, retry on 503, max retries exhausted, timeout, backoff timing assertion, idempotent GET retry, no-retry on 4xx (except 429)

Verification

$ pytest tests/test_api_client.py -v
42 passed in 2.34s

$ grep -r "RetryTransport" src/
src/api_client.py:23: class RetryTransport(httpx.BaseTransport):
src/api_client.py:45:     self._transport = RetryTransport(...)

$ python -c "from src.api_client import ApiClient; c = ApiClient(); print(type(c._transport))"
<class 'src.api_client.RetryTransport'>

Edge Cases Handled

• Connection timeouts (retry with backoff)
• Rate limiting (429 → retry after delay)
• Server errors (5xx → retry)
• Client errors except 429 (no retry — 4xx means the request is bad)
• Idempotency: GET, PUT, DELETE retry; POST does not (configurable)

Merge: PR #423

---

Evaluation Report

============================================================
AGENT SELF-EVALUATION REPORT
============================================================

  Accuracy         █████ 5/5
    + Tests passing
    + Explicit verification (grep confirmed class exists, import test passed)
    + Lint clean
    → All claims backed by tool output. No hedging.

  Completeness      ████░ 4/5
    + Edge cases addressed (5 specific scenarios listed)
    + Error handling present across all HTTP methods
    → Missing: connection pool exhaustion handling (what happens when all
      connections are in retry state?) — minor gap, not blocking.

  Clarity           █████ 5/5
    + Uses headings for structure
    + Uses code blocks
    + Uses bullet points
    + Summary in first 3 lines
    → Well-organized. Reader can scan in 10 seconds.

  Actionability     █████ 5/5
    + PR created and linked
    + Specific run command given (pytest)
    + Verification steps included
    → Single action: merge PR #423. Everything else is done.

  Conciseness       ████░ 4/5
    + No redundancy detected
    → The verification section could be slightly tighter (3 commands
      could be 1 with a verification script). Minor.

  OVERALL           4.6/5

TOP IMPROVEMENTS:
  No axes below 4. Strong output across all dimensions.

Why This Scores Well

1. Accuracy pinned to tool output. Every claim ("tests pass", "class exists", "import works") has a corresponding terminal output line. No "should work" or "probably fine."
2. Completeness is explicit about what's covered AND what's not. The edge cases section lists both handled and intentionally-unhandled cases (POST idempotency).
3. Actionability is single-step. The user only needs to merge one PR. No follow-up tasks, no "then configure X."
4. Concision is tight. The output is ~250 words. The information density is high — every sentence carries weight.