Claude Skill

principle-separate-before-serializing-shared-state

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.

LLM Mart · 0 points · 0 views 0 listing impressions 0 install-command copies
Virus-scanned Reviewed automatically before listing.

Full trust report

Download michael-denyer-pstack-claude-plugins_pstack_skills_principle-separate-before-serializing-shared-state-4b3933e.zip · 0 KB
Part of michael-denyer/pstack-claude — 51 skills

Install

skills CLI npx skills add https://github.com/michael-denyer/pstack-claude/tree/main/plugins/pstack/skills/principle-separate-before-serializing-shared-state
Claude Code claude plugin marketplace add https://llmmart.ai/marketplace.json && claude plugin install michael-denyer-pstack-claude@llmmart
Git git clone https://github.com/michael-denyer/pstack-claude.git

The skills CLI installs just this skill, for any of its supported agents. Claude Code installs the whole michael-denyer/pstack-claude collection as a plugin from our marketplace. Git is the plain clone.

Skill manifest

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.
Files (pstack-claude)
  • SKILL.md 1.5 KB
    ---
    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."
    user-invocable: false
    ---
    
    # 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.
    

Comments (0)

Sign in to join the conversation.

No comments yet.

Reviews (0)

No reviews yet.

Related