concurrency-review

A code-review agent that looks for problems involving work happening at the same time, such as asynchronous tasks, callbacks, shared data, and repeated operations.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review JavaScript, TypeScript, C#, or Java code for missing waits, unsafe shared state, locking problems, and idempotency concerns—whether repeating an operation is safe.
Why use it?
These problems can cause race conditions, data loss, or unpredictable results that are difficult to reproduce. The review flags likely risks and indicates how certain the finding is.

Agent

Install

Getting it into your agent

One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.

agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/bdfinst/agentic-dev-team/concurrency-review
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/bdfinst/agentic-dev-team
Per session 17 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 1,160 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00017 $0.01160
Opus 5 $0.00009 $0.00580
Sonnet 5 $0.00003 $0.00232
Haiku 4.5 $0.00002 $0.00116

Measured 3d ago against content hash 330b9e44c152, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

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 3d 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.

plugins/dev-team/agents/concurrency-review.md · 102 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 102 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, or SharedArrayBuffer
    • C#: no async/await, Task, Thread, Parallel, lock, or ConcurrentCollection
    • Java: no Thread, ExecutorService, CompletableFuture, synchronized, volatile, or java.util.concurrent
  • 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() or try/catch on await
    • C#: unawaited Task with no .ContinueWith error handler; async void methods
    • Java: unhandled CompletableFuture without .exceptionally() or .handle()
  • Dangling async operations (fire-and-forget without intent):
    • JS/TS: async calls without await
    • C#: Task not awaited and not stored
    • Java: CompletableFuture not awaited and not stored
  • 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
  • Sequential operations that could be parallel:
    • JS/TS: sequential await calls with no dependency between them (use Promise.all)
    • C#: sequential await calls with no dependency (use Task.WhenAll)
    • Java: sequential get() calls with no dependency (use CompletableFuture.allOf)
  • Iteration not awaited:
    • JS/TS: async callback in forEach (does not await iterations; use for...of)
    • C#: async lambda in List.ForEach (fire-and-forget; use foreach + await)
    • Java: async-like operations inside stream().forEach without joining

Read the full file on GitHub · 102 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 3d ago First seen · 102 lines · 17 tokens per session scan A 330b9e44c152

Subscribe to this mod's changes

concurrency-review is an agent published in the GitHub repository bdfinst/agentic-dev-team (277 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 1,160 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 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.