functors unique up to self-equivalence of the source category Call two functors two functors $H,H':S\longrightarrow T$  weakly equivalent, or equivalent up to a self-equivalence of the source category, iff
there exists a self-equivalence of $s:S \longrightarrow S$ such that functors $H$ and $H'\circ s$ are equivalent.

Can this property "weakly equivalent" be nicely reformulated in the language of higher category theory? or maybe homotopy theory?  
Are there theorems claiming that any two functors with certain properties (not involving choice) are weakly equivalent?

That is, for such a theorem to be interesting, the properties should not explicitly involve an arbitrary choice, e.g. it should not say: choose a topology, bijection, self-equivalence and then construct the functor in the following way. Rather, a functor should be described in terms of preserving some structure etc. 
Below is the original question which was phrased very confusingly, it seems. I hope now it maybe is clearer. 
Say a functor is "well-defined up to a self-equivalence of the source category"
by certain properties/definition/construction iff, well,
for any two functors $H,H':S\longrightarrow T$ with satisfying these properties/definition/obtained by this construction,
there exists a self-equivalence of $s:S \longrightarrow S$ such that functors $H$ and $H'\circ s$ are equivalent.

Is there a nice way to reformulate this property
  "a functor unique up to self-equivalence of the source category", say in the language of 2-categories?
Are there any interesting examples of properties/definitions/constructions NOT involving arbitrary choice
  and yet such that the functor is well-defined  up to a self-equivalence of source category ?

I am mostly interested to see an "algebraic" definition of a functor between "algebraic" categories which is well-defined up to self-equivalence but not well-defined.
 A: In short, this is equivalence of objects in the weak slice 2-category $\mathbf{CAT}/T$.
First recall the classical notion of slice category: given any category $\mathcal{C}$ and object $C$, there's a category $\mathcal{C}/C$ (called $\mathcal{C}$ sliced over $C$) whose objects are the maps in $\mathcal{C}$ with codomain $C$ and whose maps are commutative triangles.
When $\mathcal{C}$ is a 2-category, you can make the same sort of definition (so that any object $C$ of $\mathcal{C}$ gives rise to a slice 2-category $\mathcal{C}/C$), but you now have a choice to make.  The objects of $\mathcal{C}/C$ are defined as before, but you could ask for the 1-cells in $\mathcal{C}/C$ to be strictly commutative triangles, or triangles that commute up to a specified invertible 2-cell, or triangles that commute up to a specified not-necessarily-invertible 2-cell (and then you have to decided which way it points).  In all cases, there's an obvious way to define the 2-cells of $\mathcal{C}/C$.
Let's take the "weak" or "pseudo" version of $\mathcal{C}/C$, in which the 1-cells are triangles that commute up to a specified invertible 2-cell.  Take two objects of $\mathcal{C}/C$, say $h\colon D \to C$ and $h'\colon D' \to C$.  In any 2-category, there's a notion of equivalence of objects.  In this case, $h$ and $h'$ are equivalent in $\mathcal{C}/C$ if and only if there's an equivalence $s\colon D \to D'$ in $\mathcal{C}$ such that $h' \circ s \cong h$.
Applied to $\mathcal{C} = \mathbf{CAT}$, this gives the notion of "weak equivalence" you mention.  (It just so happens that in your setting, the domains of $H$ and $H'$ are equal.)
A: This is a mine observation (from old personal paper), may be can help. I hope my English is understandable
I thought about this question in correlation to proposition 2.2.1 p.31 of "Indexed categories and its Applications" LNM 661:
Give a functor $F:\mathcal{C}^{op}\to Cat$ (i.e. a strict indexed category) if its  objets and morphisms presheaf are representable:  $\mathcal{A}(C_0, -)\cong F_0$, $\mathcal{A}(C_1, -)\cong F_1$ by Yoneda lemma  domain, codomain the transformations $d_0:  F_1\Rightarrow F_0$, $d_1:  F_1\Rightarrow F_0$ ecc. describe a internal category $\underline{C}$ of $\mathcal{A}$ and a isomorphism $F\cong [\mathcal{C} ]$ where $[\mathcal{C}]$ is the presheaf of (small) categories defined as $|[\mathcal{C}](A)|_0=\mathcal{A}(A, C_k)\ k=0, 1$ ecc.
But what if $F$ is a pseudo.functor? ($F_0$, $F_1$ aren't presheaves, for the composition we haven't the strict coherence, but accompanied by automorphisms on codomain..)
The authors of the reference above consider $F_0(A)$ as the class of (canonically) isomorphic object of $|F(A)|_0$, and for $F_1(A)$ as the class of (canonically) isomorphic morphisms (as objects of $F(A)^{\underline{2}}$). At first reading I seem that this reduction to "pseudo-skeletons"  avoid the trouble of the canonical isomorphisms. I remember that the skeleton of a (small) category is make by a chose of a object for any isomorphic call, and make the full subcategory. But how is related a small category $\mathcal{C}$ with its pseudo-skeleton $pS(\mathcal{C})$?
Of course we have the natural functor (make  the quotient maps) $\pi: \mathcal{C}\to pS(\mathcal{C})$, now, try to define a reciprocal (equivalence we hope) functor $P$, merely a "chose functor":  then $P$ map any object $\xi\in pS(\mathcal{C})$ to a  its representant $X_{\xi}\in \mathcal{C}$ with $[X_\xi]=\xi$, and any morphism $\alpha: \xi\to \xi'$ to a its representant $f_\alpha: X_\xi\to X_{\xi'}$ with $[f_\alpha]=\alpha$, 
(observe that a different chose $g_{\xi}$ is related to $f_\xi$ by automorphisms on domain and codomain $X_\xi$, $X_{\xi'}$ this is a generalization to the initial question)
we can chose $P(1_\xi)=1_{X_\xi}$ of course, but in general $f_{\gamma\circ\xi}\neq f_{\gamma}\circ f_\xi$ but these are related by automorphisms on domain and codomain. 
Then I consider 2-category $G(\mathcal{C})$ make as follow: take the usual skeleton $Sk(\mathcal{C})$, then for $f, g: X\to Y$ define 2-cell $f\Rightarrow g$ as a couple of isomorhisms $s: X\to X,\ t: Y\to Y$ with $t\circ f=g\circ s$ (with natural composition and identities) then I have a correct 2-equivalences (make by a 2-functor and a pseudo-functor)) from $G(\mathcal{C})$ and its local skeleton (take skeleton on Hom-categories) that is just the pseudo-skeleton  $pS(\mathcal{C})$ . 
