code-audit-fanout — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited code-audit-fanout (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.
USE for any code review request where correctness matters more than speed. Especially:
hardware-determinism primitives
SKIP for trivial edits (typo fix, rename, formatting).
Each spawned in parallel in ONE assistant message. Each has a narrow scope, a required source list, and a citation contract.
Scope: Read-only static analysis. Tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Bash Checks:
ruff check --select ALL outputmypy --strict output (if config present, else mypy)pyright if availableexcept:, except Exception:, swallowed errorsCitation requirement: every flagged rule must reference the exact ruff / mypy / pyright rule ID and link to the rule docs.
Scope: Verify every imported API call against official docs. Tools: Read, Grep, WebFetch, WebSearch Required sources (in order of precedence):
Procedure:
X.Y.Z(...) call.gotchas in the docs (the "Note" / "Warning" boxes)?
per docs URL — quoted doc passage. Citation requirement: every finding cites the exact doc URL + section anchor + a verbatim quote. HARD RULE: if a fetch fails or the page doesn't mention the symbol, mark UNVERIFIED. Do NOT guess.
Scope: For wireless / signal-processing code only. Verify the code's constants and procedures against published standards. Tools: Read, WebFetch, WebSearch Required sources:
provides access)
Checks:
Citation requirement: every numeric constant or procedure verified must cite TS/TR number + clause + table + quoted line. HARD RULE: if the user's code is not wireless, this specialist returns "NOT APPLICABLE" and does not invent issues.
Scope: Ensure the code will produce the same result on a second run. Tools: Read, Grep, WebFetch Required sources:
Checks (cite the relevant doc section for each):
random.seed, np.random.seed,torch.manual_seed, torch.cuda.manual_seed_all
PYTHONHASHSEED, CUBLAS_WORKSPACE_CONFIG=:4096:8torch.use_deterministic_algorithms(True) presenttorch.backends.cudnn.deterministic = True and benchmark = Falseworker_init_fn + generator=torch.Generator() setPRNGKey threading; no global jax.random callsscatter_add_,index_add_, bincount, embedding-bag backward, CTC loss, pooling backwards
Citation requirement: each finding cites the exact PyTorch / JAX / NumPy doc URL + the warning passage that justifies the rule.
Scope: Catch silent numerical bugs. Tools: Read, Grep, WebFetch Required sources:
Checks:
norm="ortho" vs "backward" vs"forward")
lin2db, db2lin); no bare10*log10 or 10**(x/10)
(Sionna: [batch, rx, tx, subcarrier, symbol])
appropriate Citation requirement: every claim about a library behavior cites the docs URL + quoted passage. Claims about the user's own math must cite the user-supplied paper / equation number.
After all 5 specialists return, ONE final aggregator agent (general-purpose) merges results.
Aggregator system prompt:
You are merging 5 specialist code-audit reports. Do NOT add new
findings. Do NOT remove any cited finding. Your job:
1. Group findings by file:line — show all specialists who flagged
the same line together.
2. Deduplicate identical findings (same line, same root cause).
3. Rank by severity:
- CRITICAL — code will not run, or returns silently wrong values
- HIGH — reproducibility broken, results not trustworthy
- MEDIUM — style / maintainability / minor numerical risk
- LOW — cosmetic
4. Emit final report in this exact structure:
## Summary
- N findings total (X critical, Y high, Z medium, W low)
- K verified vs U unverified
- File coverage: list of files reviewed
## Findings
For each finding:
### [SEVERITY] file:line — short title
- **Specialist:** name
- **Problem:** 1-2 sentences
- **Source:** URL + verbatim quoted passage
- **Fix:** minimal diff or code snippet
## UNVERIFIED claims (skipped)
- List anything a specialist could not source
## What was NOT checked
- Be explicit about gaps (e.g. "no integration tests run",
"GPU-specific behavior not reproduced on this machine")
NEVER invent a finding. NEVER paraphrase a source quote — quote
verbatim. If a specialist had zero findings, say so explicitly.I want a 5-way parallel audit of the following code.
CODE TO AUDIT:
<paste file path OR ```python ... ``` block>
CONTEXT (optional — fill if relevant):
- This code implements: <one-line description>
- Reference paper / spec: <citation or URL if any>
- Known constraints: <e.g. must run deterministic on A100>
SPAWN 5 SPECIALISTS IN PARALLEL IN ONE MESSAGE:
1. static-analyzer
2. library-api-auditor
3. standards-spec-auditor (or "NOT APPLICABLE" if not wireless)
4. reproducibility-auditor
5. numerical-correctness-auditor
Each must follow the citation contract from the code-audit-fanout
skill: every finding cites a URL + verbatim quoted passage. No
claim without a source. UNVERIFIED items must be marked, not
hidden.
After all 5 return, spawn the aggregator agent to merge. Show me
the merged report ONLY — do not show raw specialist outputs.SKILL.md — this file. Self-contained — all 5 specialist prompts, theaggregator prompt, the orchestrator template, and the citation contract are inline above. No companion files required to run.
Every finding MUST include:
Example of a valid finding:
HIGH — train.py:42 — torch.use_deterministic_algorithms not called
Specialist: reproducibility-auditor
Problem: Code seeds RNGs but does not enable deterministic
algorithms. CUBLAS, cuDNN convolutions, and atomicAdd float ops
will produce different bit patterns across runs.
Source: https://docs.pytorch.org/docs/stable/notes/randomness.html
§"Avoiding nondeterministic algorithms"
Quote: "torch.use_deterministic_algorithms() lets you configure
PyTorch to use deterministic algorithms instead of nondeterministic
ones where available, and to throw an error if an operation is
known to be nondeterministic (and without a deterministic alternative)."
Fix:
import torch
torch.use_deterministic_algorithms(True, warn_only=False)
torch.backends.cudnn.deterministic = True
torch.backends.cudnn.benchmark = FalseExample of what is NOT allowed:
❌ "I think this might cause issues with reproducibility."
❌ "PyTorch docs say something about determinism."
❌ "This API was deprecated recently."
❌ Any finding without URL + verbatim quote + anchor.| Failure | Cause | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| Specialist invents an API that doesn't exist | Skipped WebFetch verification | Re-run with explicit "no claim without quoted source" rule |
| Specialist quotes outdated docs | Library version mismatch | Tell orchestrator the exact library version installed |
| Aggregator drops findings | Over-aggressive dedup | Use "preserve unique URLs even if same line" rule |
| All 5 specialists fire sequentially | Spawned in separate messages | Re-issue as a single message with 5 Agent calls |
| 3GPP fetch blocked / requires login | 3GPP portal session needed | Specialist marks UNVERIFIED + suggests user downloads PDF |
| Specialist times out | Code too long | Chunk by function. Run audit per-function in a secondary fanout. |
~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.