concurrency-correctness — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited concurrency-correctness (Agent Skill) and scored it 92/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 2 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 2 flagged
The text {match} tells the agent to skip the normal "ask the user first" gate. Used adversarially it removes the human-in-the-loop check before destructive or sensitive actions, turning a normally-gated agent into a fire-and-forget executor.
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.
Concurrency bugs are nondeterministic and brutal to debug — get the design right up front rather than patching symptoms.
same mutable data. Enumerate it. The safest design shares nothing — pass messages / immutable data instead.
writes with the same lock (or use an atomic/concurrent structure). A single unguarded access defeats the lock.
them as briefly as possible; don't call out to unknown code while holding one.
— interleavings you didn't see still happen. check-then-act is a race unless atomic.
concurrent code, synchronize on events/barriers — never sleep to dodge a race.
cancelled; propagate errors from workers instead of losing them.
Red flags: a sleep "fixing" flakiness, a lock around some-but-not-all accesses, shared mutable state with no guard, swallowed worker exceptions.
~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.