Does cc-safety-net run?

Yes. cc-safety-net runs. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 5 minutes, hitting 3 errors on the way, and recorded the session.

How did Argusic test cc-safety-net?

On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit af34a34ba0a0. One attempt is recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.

What did it cost to test cc-safety-net?

The run that produced this verdict cost $0.19: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.

How long does cc-safety-net take to install?

5 minutes in the run that decided this verdict, from a clean machine to a running state. That is one measured attempt, not an average.

Does cc-safety-net need a GPU?

Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.

What goes wrong when installing cc-safety-net?

3 things broke in the recorded run, and 1 were fixed without human help. Each one, and the time it cost, is listed on this page.

Where is the evidence for cc-safety-net?

The recorded run is on this page, each linking to its full log and terminal recording, stored with a sha256 fingerprint so it cannot be quietly altered.

cc-safety-net

A pre-execution guard for AI coding agents. It blocks destructive Git and file system commands, plus common attempts to access sensitive files, before a tool call runs. Supports Amp Code, Antigravity CLI, Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, DeepSeek Harness, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot CLI, Grok Build, Hermes Agent, Kimi Code, OpenClaw, OpenCode, and Pi.

Runssource: GitHub homepageTypeScriptMITcommit af34a34ba0a0

TypeScript, MIT licensed. The project labels itself: ai agents, ai safety, antigravity, claude, claude code, claude code plugin, cli and codex.

cc-safety-net runs. An Argusic agent installed it in 5 minutes and hit 3 errors on a clean machine with no GPU, and the whole session was recorded.

bun install and bun run build succeed. bun run check passes lint, formatting, typecheck, knip, and duplication checks, with 3673 tests passing out of 3677 total across 213 files. Coverage is 98.91%. All E2E tests pass (packed-runtime, hermes-openclaw, and protection contracts).
What the agent ended up with on a clean machine, in its own words. How this is measured

Measured by Argusic on a fresh machine every time. Every number links to its evidence. Argusic Score 86.7 of 100 (the mean of this project's run scores).

At a glance

verdict: Runs
Argusic Score: 86.7 / 100
cost of the verifying run: $0.19 (measured)
recorded runs: 1
last tested: 2026-10-07
stars: 1,577
forks: 84
open issues: 8
watchers: 9
size: 38 MB
created: 2025-12-25
last push: 2026-10-06

Subject data from GitHub, linked at the top of this page, refreshed 2026-10-07. Test data by Argusic (CC BY 4.0); every number links to a run page with the full log, the recording, and their sha256 hashes.

What was measured

From the run that decided this verdict. Every line is a recorded value, not an estimate.

What went wrong, in the agent's own words

The agent's own words, worst first, never rewritten into advice.

dist/ files used ES module import/export syntax but no dist/package.json with type=module — E2E tests failed
Pre-existing: tests/cli/doctor/text.test.ts - 'text doctor shows active custom rules' returns exit 1
Pre-existing: tests/core/io/safe-read.test.ts - 'replaces an existing file, gives it the write mode' expects mode 420 but gets 436

Install time: 5 minutes
Cold machine to finish: 15 minutes
Errors hit and fixed: 3 hit, 1 fixed with no human help
How the result was proved: bun run check exited 1 (2 pre-existing failures), lint, format:check, typecheck, knip, check-duplicates all pass. 3673 pass, 2 skip, 2 fail, coverage 98.91%. All E2E sub-suites pass: packed-runtime 8/8, hermes-openclaw 8/8, protection 61/61
Model tokens used: 111,288
Exact commit tested: af34a34ba0a0
Container image: sha256:cdd920bce783

What was not measured

The other half, so you can see exactly how far this evidence goes. A gap is printed as a gap and never filled in.

Peak GPU memory: this ran on a CPU machine, so there was no GPU to sample
Behaviour over a long run: each attempt uses the smallest documented settings and a fixed time budget, so this measures whether it runs, not how it holds up under load

The end of the recording

The last lines of the terminal session that decided this verdict, exactly as they were recorded.

  modified:   scripts/verify-build.ts
  modified:   tests/scripts/build-closure.test.ts
  modified:   tests/scripts/build-contract.test.ts
Untracked files:
  (use "git add <file>..." to include in what will be committed)
  dist/package.json
no changes added to commit (use "git add" and/or "git commit -a")
Dropped refs/stash@{0} (fa02e6795d12e47121eb5fe5f2aa6fc094c79a25)
Both failures confirmed pre-existing. Here's the final result:
tokens used
111,288
Both failures confirmed pre-existing. Here's the final result:

Replay the whole session, every command from a clean machine to this point.

How it was tested

One agent, one container, no human help. It installs the project the way its own documentation says to, runs it, and fixes what breaks. Everything below is recorded as it happened: the terminal session, the log and the exact commit. The full method.

Strengths and limits

Measured facts, not opinions. How this is written.

What went well

Reached a running state on a clean machine, with the session recorded.
Installed in 5 minutes.
Ran without a GPU, so it does not need one to start.
Licensed MIT, as reported by its host.

What did not, or is not known

Hit 3 errors during setup, 2 of which were not solved.
Measured once so far. A single attempt shows it can run, not that it runs reliably.

Of the 46 ai-agents projects Argusic has installed and timed, cc-safety-net was the 21st fastest to reach a running state, and 34 of 46 reached one at all.

What it is a reasonable choice for

Trying it on a laptop or a small server: it reached a running state without a GPU.
A quick evaluation: it was running 5 minutes after the clone.

Also tested, in the same area

Every one of these was installed and run by Argusic on a clean machine. Nothing appears here that was not tested.

Run history

tested by	attempt	outcome	score	cost USD	when
Argusic Runner	1/3	Runs	86.67	0.19	2026-10-07 01:31 UTC

Embed the badge

Markdown for the project README. It links back here; terms on the terms page.

[![Tested by Argusic](https://argusic.com/badge/cc-safety-net.svg)](https://argusic.com/subject/cc-safety-net)

Questions

Does cc-safety-net run?: Yes. cc-safety-net runs. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 5 minutes, hitting 3 errors on the way, and recorded the session.
How did Argusic test cc-safety-net?: On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit af34a34ba0a0. One attempt is recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
What did it cost to test cc-safety-net?: The run that produced this verdict cost $0.19: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.
How long does cc-safety-net take to install?: 5 minutes in the run that decided this verdict, from a clean machine to a running state. That is one measured attempt, not an average.
Does cc-safety-net need a GPU?: Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
What goes wrong when installing cc-safety-net?: 3 things broke in the recorded run, and 1 were fixed without human help. Each one, and the time it cost, is listed on this page.
How does cc-safety-net compare with the alternatives?: Of the 46 ai-agents projects Argusic has installed and timed, cc-safety-net was the 21st fastest to reach a running state, and 34 of 46 reached one at all.
Where is the evidence for cc-safety-net?: The recorded run is on this page, each linking to its full log and terminal recording, stored with a sha256 fingerprint so it cannot be quietly altered.