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.
npx agentmods add commands/farzannajipour/cursor-react-rules/review-codegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Farzannajipour/cursor-react-rulesWhat 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 | $0.00000 | $0.00642 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00321 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00128 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00064 |
Grade A, and why
review-code 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 yesterday.
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 — 98 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Review Code
Overview
Comprehensive code review checklist to ensure quality, security, and maintainability.
Review Categories
1. Functionality
- Code does what it's supposed to do
- Edge cases are handled
- Error handling is appropriate
- No obvious bugs or logic errors
- Loading and error states work correctly
2. Code Quality
- Code is readable and well-structured
- Functions are small and focused (<50 lines)
- Components are reasonable size (<200 lines)
- Variable names are descriptive
- No code duplication
- Follows project conventions
- Complex logic has comments
3. TypeScript
- All props have interfaces
- No 'any' types (use 'unknown' if needed)
- Return types defined for functions
- Proper type inference used
- Exported types when shared
4. React Best Practices
- Functional components used
- Proper hook usage (no violations of rules)
- Keys provided for list items
- No inline functions in JSX (use useCallback)
- Memoization used appropriately
- Server Components used when possible (Next.js)
5. Next.js Specific (if applicable)
- Server Components used by default
- 'use client' only when necessary
- Metadata properly defined
- Images use next/image
- Loading and error UI provided
- Proper caching strategy
6. Styling
- Tailwind CSS used consistently
- Responsive design implemented
- Dark mode support (if required)
- No inline styles (use Tailwind)
7. Security
- No obvious security vulnerabilities
- Input validation present
- Sensitive data handled properly
- No hardcoded secrets
- XSS prevention in place
8. Accessibility
- Semantic HTML used
- ARIA labels where needed
- Keyboard navigation works
- Proper color contrast
- Focus states visible
9. Performance
- No unnecessary re-renders
- Large lists virtualized (if needed)
- Images optimized
- Code splitting implemented
- Bundle size considered
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.
- yesterday First seen · 98 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 3c6c3f80ca4c
review-code is a command published in the GitHub repository Farzannajipour/cursor-react-rules (3 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 642 tokens. 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
checklist
Generate a custom checklist for the current feature based on user requirements.
clarify
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
specify
Create or update the feature specification from a natural language feature description.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.
converge
Assess the current codebase against the feature's spec, plan, and tasks, then append any remaining unbuilt work as new tasks to tasks.md so implement can complete it.
implement
Execute the implementation plan by processing and executing all tasks defined in tasks.md.