When NOT to use this status (common misuses)
Using 400 for authentication/authorization failures.
Clients cannot distinguish validation vs auth; retry/login flows break.
Using 404 to mask permission issues everywhere.
Monitoring misclassifies access bugs; SEO can degrade if real pages appear missing.
Returning 4xx for server-side bugs.
Clients stop retrying; incidents are masked as client behavior.
Returning 429 without Retry-After/backoff guidance.
Retry storms amplify throttling and degrade availability.
FAQ
Should clients retry on HTTP 429?
Retry after the indicated window (Retry-After) with exponential backoff and jitter.
Is HTTP 429 cacheable?
Generally should not be cached unless explicitly intended; use Cache-Control to prevent sticky failures.
Which headers matter most for HTTP 429?
Content-Type and Cache-Control are the baseline. Some codes also require Location, WWW-Authenticate, or Retry-After.
How does this affect monitoring?
Client errors should be tracked as contract/UX issues; page only if widespread.
How does this affect crawlers/SEO?
SEO impact is driven mostly by cacheability, canonical stability, and content correctness.
What should error responses include?
A stable, machine-parseable format with correlation IDs and actionable messages.