Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add bdfinst/agentic-dev-team/plugin install dev-teamWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/agents/bdfinst/agentic-dev-team/concurrency-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/bdfinst/agentic-dev-team/concurrency-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bdfinst/agentic-dev-team/concurrency-review/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/bdfinst/agentic-dev-team/concurrency-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bdfinst/agentic-dev-team/concurrency-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00017 | $0.01239 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00496 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00248 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00124 |
Grade A, and why
concurrency-review scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 17d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 110 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Concurrency Review
Scope: always Cites: [adversarial-review-protocol]
Output JSON: per ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/knowledge/review-agent-output-contract.md (Whole-file load: short, canonical schema).
Status: pass=no concurrency issues, warn=potential concerns, fail=likely race conditions or safety violations Severity: error=race condition or data corruption risk, warning=potential concurrency concern, suggestion=defensive improvement Confidence: high=mechanical pattern fix (add await, add finally); medium=fix direction clear but requires understanding shared state; none=requires human judgment (architectural concurrency design)
Context needs: full-file
Skip
Return {"status": "skip", "issues": [], "summary": "No concurrency-relevant patterns in target"} when:
- No concurrency-relevant patterns present:
- JS/TS: no
async/await,Promise,Worker, orSharedArrayBuffer - C#: no
async/await,Task,Thread,Parallel,lock, orConcurrentCollection - Java: no
Thread,ExecutorService,CompletableFuture,synchronized,volatile, orjava.util.concurrent
- JS/TS: no
- No shared mutable state across callbacks, event handlers, or concurrent paths
- Pure synchronous single-threaded code with no event-driven patterns
Detect
Race conditions:
- Read-then-write without atomicity (check-then-act)
- Shared mutable state accessed from multiple async paths
- Event handlers modifying shared state without guards
- Database read-modify-write without transactions or optimistic locking
- File operations without locking (open-write-close races)
Idempotency:
- Non-idempotent HTTP handlers (POST/PUT without deduplication)
- Side effects in retry-able operations (payments, emails, queue messages)
- Missing idempotency keys on critical mutations
Async/concurrent task pitfalls:
- Unhandled rejections/exceptions:
- JS/TS: missing
.catch()ortry/catchonawait - C#: unawaited
Taskwith no.ContinueWitherror handler;async voidmethods - Java: unhandled
CompletableFuturewithout.exceptionally()or.handle()
- JS/TS: missing
- Dangling async operations (fire-and-forget without intent):
- JS/TS: async calls without
await - C#:
Tasknot awaited and not stored - Java:
CompletableFuturenot awaited and not stored
- JS/TS: async calls without
- Parallel task failures swallowing errors:
- JS/TS:
Promise.all— one rejection cancels all without individual error handling - C#:
Task.WhenAll— exceptions from individual tasks swallowed unless explicitly checked - Java:
CompletableFuture.allOf— individual failures require explicit.exceptionally()per stage
- JS/TS:
- Sequential operations that could be parallel:
- JS/TS: sequential
awaitcalls with no dependency between them (usePromise.all) - C#: sequential
awaitcalls with no dependency (useTask.WhenAll) - Java: sequential
get()calls with no dependency (useCompletableFuture.allOf)
- JS/TS: sequential
- Iteration not awaited:
- JS/TS:
asynccallback inforEach(does not await iterations; usefor...of) - C#:
asynclambda inList.ForEach(fire-and-forget; useforeach+await) - Java:
async-like operations insidestream().forEachwithout joining
- JS/TS:
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 17d ago Changed · +8 lines 10eabbc58932
- 1mo ago First seen · 102 lines · 17 tokens per session scan A 330b9e44c152
concurrency-review is an agent published in the GitHub repository bdfinst/agentic-dev-team (295 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 1,239 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
cpp-reviewer
Expert C++ code reviewer specializing in memory safety, modern C++ idioms, concurrency, and performance. Use for all C++ code changes. MUST BE USED for C++ projects.
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagent
Thermo-nuclear code quality audit (maintainability, structure, 1k-line rule, spaghetti, code-judo). Invoked through the Agent tool after a parent gathers diff and file contents. Loads rubric from the thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review skill in this plugin.
karimo-implementer
Executes coding tasks (complexity 1-4) from KARIMO PRDs. Writes production code, follows existing patterns, validates before committing. Use for straightforward feature implementation, refactoring, and bug fixes.
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.