Even if you fixed the initialized data problem, this code is still a bug waiting to happen. It should be a single bool in the struct to handle the state for the function as there are only two states that actually make sense.

succeeded = true; error = true; //This makes no sense

succeeded = false; error = false; //This makes no sense

Otherwise if I'm checking a response, I am generally going to check just "succeeded" or "error" and miss one of the two above states that "shouldn't happen", or if I check both it's both a lot of awkward extra code and I'm left with trying to output an error for a state that again makes no sense.

It happens often when "error" field is not a bool, but a string, aka error_message. Could be empty string, or _null_, or even _undefined_ if we're in JS.

Then the obvious question why do we need _succeeded_ at all, if we can always check for _error_. Sometimes it can be useful, when the server doesn't know itself if the operation is succeeded (e.g. an IO/database operation timed out), so it might be succeeded, but should also show an error message to user.

Another possibility if the succeeded is not a bool, but, say, "succeeded_at" timestamp. In general, I noticed that almost always any boolean value in database can be replaced with a timestamp or an error code.