Principle Separate Before Serializing Shared StateSAFE
Cursor plugin specification and official plugins
Overview
Cursor plugin specification and official plugins
890eaf6b2dddOBSERVED · 2026-10-12What it tells the agent
The instruction file, verbatim from the audited commit — this is the text the model reads, and the surface the audit's instruction layer examines. Quoted here so you can judge it without cloning anything.
--- name: principle-separate-before-serializing-shared-state description: "Apply when concurrent actors might write to the same file, branch, key, or state object. Eliminate the sharing first; serialize structurally only when one shared writer is a real invariant." disable-model-invocation: true --- # Separate Before Serializing Shared State When concurrent actors might share mutable state, first ask whether they need the same mutable object. If not, eliminate the sharing. When sharing is real, enforce serialization structurally: lockfiles, sequential phases, exclusive ownership. Instructions and conventions are not concurrency control. **Why:** Concurrent writes to shared state create race conditions that are intermittent, hard to reproduce, and expensive to debug. **Pattern:** 1. **Identify shared mutable state** (files both read and write, branches both push to, APIs both define and consume). 2. **Default: eliminate the shared write target.** Ask: do these actors need one canonical object, or are they publishing independent facts? Give each actor its own owned file, key, branch, or state directory, and merge only at the read/reporting boundary. Two workers writing their own `lastX` field into one `state.json` is still shared mutation. `indexer-state.json` + `metrics-state.json` is not. 3. **Only when one shared write target is a real invariant, serialize access structurally** (lockfiles, sequential phases, single-writer actor, or atomic compare-and-swap). Treat "we need a lock" as a design smell to check, not as the default answer.
Trust audit
SAFEgrade B · trust 89/100 Nothing in the source contradicts what it says it does. Grade A is reserved for packages that have also passed the behavioural sandbox.
| Layer | What it checks | Result |
|---|---|---|
| L0 | Provenance & inventory | PASS |
| L1 | Static analysis of the code | NA |
| L2 | Instruction surface (what it tells the agent) | PASS |
| L3 | Class-specific surface | PASS |
| L4 | Behavioural (sandbox) | SKIPPED |
What the source does
- Filesystem
- none-observed
- Network
- none-observed
- Shell
- none-observed
- Dependencies
- pinned
- Secrets in source
- none-found
Findings (0)
No findings outside the package's declared scope.
Gates applied: no_behavioural_pass.
890eaf6b2dddfull audit observations/trust-audit/skill/cursor__principle-separate-before-serializing-shared-state.json · Report an issue / request a re-scanAudit history
Every audit this skill has had.
| Date | Source | Verdict | Grade | Score | Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-12 | 890eaf6b2ddd | SAFE | B | 89 | first audit |
Questions
What does the Principle Separate Before Serializing Shared State skill do?
Cursor plugin specification and official plugins
Is Principle Separate Before Serializing Shared State safe to install?
The audit found nothing in the source that contradicts what it says it does, and graded it B (89/100). Grade A is held back for packages that have also passed a sandboxed behavioural run, which is why a clean skill reads B.
What can Principle Separate Before Serializing Shared State access on my machine?
The audit observed no filesystem, network or shell use at all in its source.
How current is this page?
The grade is for one exact copy of the source (890eaf6b2ddd), read on 2026-10-12. The repository is watched, and a new audit runs when it changes — this is the first audit.