agent's reserved-instance exchange failed — no matching offerings

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

RI exchanges require AWS to have matching capacity offerings in the target AZ, and right now there are none, so the exchange cannot complete. Broaden the exchange (different AZ, or convertible RI flexibility), or retry later when offerings return. The exchange is a marketplace transaction; no offering means no trade.

Error

agent's reserved-instance exchange failed  -  no matching offerings in this AZ

Steps

1. Confirm the failure reason: no matching offerings in the target AZ. Expected: the error names the AZ and the offering gap.
2. Check whether the RI is convertible (which allows broader exchanges) or standard (which is constrained). Expected: the RI type determines the options.
3. Try the exchange against a different AZ with available offerings. Expected: the exchange completes in the new AZ.
4. If the AZ is fixed, retry the exchange later; offerings fluctuate with capacity. Expected: the exchange succeeds when offerings return.
5. For future purchases, prefer convertible RIs or Savings Plans where AZ flexibility matters. Expected: the portfolio avoids the constraint.

When to use

• An RI exchange fails for lack of AZ offerings.
• The target AZ has no matching capacity.
• Planning RI portfolio flexibility.

When not to use

• The exchange is blocked by RI state rules (e.g. pending payment).
• The RI is not eligible for exchange at all.
• The goal is to sell on the marketplace, not exchange.

Tool compatibility

AWS EC2 Reserved Instances (current 2026 releases).

Variant phrasings

"no offerings available" on ri exchange

Broaden the AZ or retry later.

standard ri stuck in one az

Convertible RIs and Savings Plans offer more flexibility.

exchange keeps failing in the same az

The AZ has no matching capacity. Try another.

Why it happens

An RI exchange is AWS swapping your reservation for another from its available inventory; if no matching offering exists in that AZ, there is nothing to swap. Standard RIs are the most constrained (same family, tenancy, and often AZ), which is why convertible RIs and Savings Plans exist: they trade a slightly smaller discount for the flexibility to move. The agent should check RI type before promising an exchange will work.

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pstoXAD1hvmow2a6krgjo5cQ

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pstoXAD1hvmow2a6krgjo5cQ

Thread query: agent's reserved-instance exchange failed - no matching offerings in this AZ

TL;DR: RI exchanges require AWS to have matching capacity offerings in the target AZ, and right now there are none, so the exchange cannot complete. Broaden the exchange (different AZ, or convertible RI flexibility), or retry later when offerings return. The exchange is a marketplace transaction; no offering means no trade.

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR: Never select shutdown targets by name substring. Switch the schedule to an exact tag such as shutdown-schedule=true, and give canaries an explicit exclusion tag the agent always honors. Names describe things; tags declare intent. The agent confused the two.

Stopping instances matching name pattern "test-*": i-0aaa111 (prod-canary-1), i-0bbb222 (prod-canary-2), i-0ccc333 (test-runner-9)

1. Get the canaries back: run aws ec2 start-instances --instance-ids i-0aaa111 i-0bbb222. Expected: instances return to running, health checks pass, the deployment pipeline unblocks.
2. Replace the name filter with a tag filter: aws ec2 describe-instances --filters Name=tag:shutdown-schedule,Values=true Name=instance-state-name,Values=running. Expected: only instances explicitly opted in are returned.
3. Add an exclusion tag the agent checks first: if an instance carries do-not-stop at all, skip it no matter what else matches. Expected: canaries tagged once are protected from every schedule forever.
4. Put a sanity gate on the schedule: the dry run must print the full target list, and it must refuse to run if the count exceeds your expected maximum or if any instance carries a prod tag. Expected: a bad filter fails loudly before stopping anything.
5. Audit every other schedule and script for name-pattern matching on start/stop/terminate. Expected: zero remaining substring filters on names for destructive actions.

Use this when

• A scheduled stop/start killed or stopped the wrong instances
• Your agent picks instances by name pattern or wildcard
• Canary, staging, or shadow-prod instances share a naming prefix with real test boxes
• You are setting up automated shutdown schedules and want safe targeting

Not for this skill when

• The wrong instances were stopped because of a wrong REGION, not a wrong filter (different problem)
• The schedule timing itself is wrong (bad cron expression) rather than the targeting
• The instances failed to stop due to permissions (that is an IAM problem, not a targeting problem)

Variant phrasings

• shutdown script stopped production instances
• agent stopped instances matching test name
• canary instances shut down by schedule
• scheduled stop hit the wrong EC2 instances

Why it happens

Names are human-readable and easy to glob, so agents reach for them first. But naming conventions drift: prod canaries get 'test-' names precisely because they test production. A name describes what something looks like; a tag declares what should happen to it. The agent treated a description as an instruction.

Edge cases

• Instances with no tags at all: decide the default explicitly (opt-in is safer for destructive schedules) and document it
• Tags must be applied at provisioning time: any instance launched without the tag slips through, so put tagging in the launch template or Terraform
• Stopping is not free of side effects: instance-store data is lost and public IPs change on stop/start unless you use Elastic IPs
• Some instances cannot be stopped (instance-store backed): the agent should catch that error and report it, not crash the whole schedule
• ASG-managed instances will just get replaced when stopped: exclude them from stop schedules or suspend the ASG first

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_s9jS6BCEzekbXmAX9lwpuw

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_s9jS6BCEzekbXmAX9lwpuw

Thread query: agent's shutdown schedule stopped the canary instances - it matched the name pattern "test-" that prod canaries also use

TL;DR:

Not specified by the original author.

TL;DR

Fix this in the agent run to search systems for a requester's personal data by doing this first: capture the exact step where the run to search systems for a requester's personal data stopped, fix that step first, whether a refused permission, a missing input, or a bad mapping, then resume the run from its last checkpoint with each finished item marked so nothing is collected twice. Do not rerun the whole job unchanged, because the same inputs produce the same failure. Prove the fix on one item, then rerun the full scope and reconcile the counts.

agent failed to complete the job to search systems for a requester's personal data

Use this when

• The operation fails with this exact problem: agent failed to complete the job to search systems for a requester's personal data.
• The same failure repeats on retry with unchanged inputs.
• An audit, review, or request is blocked until this item completes.

Not for this skill when

• The message is a platform outage notice or a general sign-in failure. Resolve that first, then return here if this problem remains.
• The operation completes and you only disagree with its output. That is a quality review, not this failure.

Steps

1. Reproduce the failure with the smallest scope that still shows it in the agent run to search systems for a requester's personal data, and copy the full message plus the item, account, or request involved into the run notes. Verify: the problem is reproduced on demand with a named item, not only seen in an old log.
2. Apply the specific fix for this problem: capture the exact step where the run to search systems for a requester's personal data stopped, fix that step first, whether a refused permission, a missing input, or a bad mapping, then resume the run from its last checkpoint with each finished item marked so nothing is collected twice. Verify: the single test item now completes or shows the expected state on a direct read-back from the source.
3. Check the neighbouring items that share the same connection, mapping, owner, or credential, because this class of failure rarely affects only one item. Verify: the neighbouring items are listed and each is marked affected or clear.
4. Compare the result counts, decisions, or statuses against the source system so a silent partial success is caught before sign-off. Verify: counts match the source or every difference is named and explained.
5. Rerun the original operation on the previously failing scope, watching for the same problem rather than assuming success from a quiet log. Verify: the operation completes and the original problem does not appear.
6. Record the fix, the triggering input, and the verification result on the item so the next occurrence is recognised immediately. Verify: the record names the problem, the fix applied, and the evidence of success.

Why it happens

The run stops at one failing step and reports only a general failure, so without step-level capture the same input fails the same way on every retry.

Variant phrasings

agent failed to complete search systems for a requester's personal data error failure

The verbatim form searchers paste from the console or ticket. Treat it identically: same fix, same single item proof, then the full rerun.

How to fix this failure in practice

The how-to phrasing for the same failure. The steps above apply unchanged; start at the reproduction step rather than skipping to the rerun.

Troubleshooting the symptom-first form

The phrasing used when the console hides the full message. Surface the full message first, confirm it matches the code block above, then follow the steps.

Compatibility: OneTrust, Transcend, DataGrail, and Securiti class privacy platforms at current versions, plus the source systems the query names; no extra tooling beyond the platform console or API access needed to verify counts.

Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_EXcrT68DAGnXv5Rfkn88kA

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_EXcrT68DAGnXv5Rfkn88kA

Thread query: agent failed to complete search systems for a requester's personal data error failure

TL;DR: Fix this in the agent run to search systems for a requester's personal data by doing this first: capture the exact step where the run to search systems for a requester's personal data stopped, fix that step first, whether a refused permission, a missing input, or a bad mapping, then resume the run from its last checkpoint with each finished item marked so nothing is collected twice. Do not rerun the whole job unchanged, because the same inputs produce the same failure. Prove the fix on one item, then rerun the full scope and reconcile the counts.