Standardize error messages across API routes
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
@yogesh201sits is already working on this.
Since Oct 21, 2026.
Assessment
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Newbie friendliness
- 38/100
- Issue type
- Refactor
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Activity status
- Quiet
- Tech stack
- next.js, typescript
- Domain
- api
Research direction
Start by auditing the routes under src/app/api/ and recording their response bodies and HTTP status codes. The issue gives a proposed success and error shape, but calls for a discussion if standardization is major and requires preserving existing client behavior. Done means documenting current patterns, proposing the standard, and implementing a proof of concept for 2–3 routes without breaking clients.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Description
API routes return inconsistent error messages. Standardize them for better client-side error handling.
Current issues:
- Some return
{ error: "..." }, others return{ message: "..." } - HTTP status codes aren't consistent
- No error codes for programmatic handling
Proposed standard:
// Success
{ success: true, data: {...} }
// Error
{
success: false,
error: {
code: "VALIDATION_ERROR" | "NOT_FOUND" | "UNAUTHORIZED",
message: "Human-readable error message"
}
}
Task:
- Audit API routes in
src/app/api/ - Document current error patterns
- Propose standardization (open Discussion if major)
- Implement for 2-3 routes as proof-of-concept
Acceptance criteria:
- Error patterns documented
- Standardization proposed
- Proof-of-concept implemented for 2-3 routes
- No breaking changes to existing clients
- Dominant language
- TypeScript
- Stars
- 3
- Forks
- 6
- Avg merge
- 13h 29m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 56
Getting set up
Starts the project's dev container in your browser, under your own GitHub account.
- Ships a Dockerfile or Docker Compose file
- Has a pull request template
- Read the contributing guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
More from grasshopper-protocol/grsshppr
-
bug UX
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 74/100
grasshopper-protocol/grsshppr#209 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
Add tests for utils.ts cn() functionPossibly taken @yogesh201sits claimed this 6 days ago. Opengood first issue testing
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 84/100
grasshopper-protocol/grsshppr#81 · 1 comment · 1 assignee ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
code quality documentation good first issue
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 66/100
grasshopper-protocol/grsshppr#78 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
a11y documentation good first issue UI
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 74/100
grasshopper-protocol/grsshppr#77 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
good first issue
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 85/100
grasshopper-protocol/grsshppr#46 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
All issues in grasshopper-protocol/grsshppr
Similar issues
-
agent-reported area/react bug
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 82/100
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
bug
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 82/100
Nimblesite/SharpLsp#510 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 76/100
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
backend refactor
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 73/100
NIAEFEUP/tts#927 · 1 comment · 1 reaction ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 82/100
callstackincubator/react-native-harness#296 ·
Maintainers usually reply within 1 day