elixir-code-review — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited elixir-code-review (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
| Issue Type | Reference |
|---|---|
| Naming, formatting, module structure | references/code-style.md |
| With clauses, guards, destructuring | references/pattern-matching.md |
| GenServer, Supervisor, Application | references/otp-basics.md |
| @moduledoc, @doc, @spec, doctests | references/documentation.md |
String.to_atom/1 on user input (use to_existing_atom/1)Code.eval_string/1 on untrusted input:erlang.binary_to_term/1 without :safe optiondef foo(nil), do: nil is valid guard| Issue | Flag ONLY IF |
|---|---|
| Missing @spec | Function is public AND exported |
| Generic rescue | Specific exception types available |
| Nested case/cond | More than 2 levels deep |
Do these in order for the review batch. Do not publish findings until each step passes.
path:line (or line range), or Module.function/arity plus a short quoted snippet from the file.Complete Gates — before reporting (section above) first; the verification protocol is mandatory input to those gates.
~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.