apex-accelerator no-hardcoded-counts.instructions.md

apex-accelerator no-hardcoded-counts.instructions.md is an instructions file for GitHub Copilot from jonathan-vella/apex-accelerator. It costs 487 tokens per session, scanned A, original, MIT.

A writing rule that stops project documentation from stating fixed numbers of agents, skills, tools, or workflow steps. It requires descriptive wording or a designated count-manifest.json file for exact counts.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it when writing project documentation, tables, comments, or validation rules that mention how many project components exist.
Why use it?
Fixed counts can become wrong when the project changes, causing documentation to drift. This keeps changing totals in one trusted file.

Instructions file for GitHub Copilot

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 instructions/jonathan-vella/apex-accelerator/no-hardcoded-counts
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/jonathan-vella/apex-accelerator

Made for: GitHub Copilot.

Wrote this? Show the measurements

A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.

agentmods badge for apex-accelerator no-hardcoded-counts.instructions.md

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/instructions/jonathan-vella/apex-accelerator/no-hardcoded-counts.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/instructions/jonathan-vella/apex-accelerator/no-hardcoded-counts)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/instructions/jonathan-vella/apex-accelerator/no-hardcoded-counts"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/instructions/jonathan-vella/apex-accelerator/no-hardcoded-counts.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 487 This file is loaded in full into every session.
When invoked 487 The same file — it is already loaded in full.
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 $0.00487 $0.00487
Opus 5 $0.00244 $0.00244
Sonnet 5 $0.00097 $0.00097
Haiku 4.5 $0.00049 $0.00049

Measured 4d ago against content hash 66d494458f71, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

apex-accelerator no-hardcoded-counts.instructions.md 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 4d 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.

.github/instructions/no-hardcoded-counts.instructions.md · 47 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 47 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

No Hard-Coded Counts

Hard-coded numeric counts for project entities drift silently and create maintenance nightmares. This instruction eliminates that class of bug.

Rule

NEVER hard-code counts of agents, subagents, skills, instructions, validators, workflow steps, VS Code extensions, or MCP tools in prose, tables, or comments.

What to Do Instead

Use descriptive language that stays true regardless of count changes:

Instead of Write
"16 top-level agents and 11 subagents" "a set of specialized agents and subagents"
"38 GA skills" "the full skill catalog"
"25 instruction files" "instruction files with glob-based auto-application"
"7-step workflow" or "8-step workflow" "the multi-step workflow"
"27 validators" "the validation suite"
"13 pricing tools" "a suite of pricing query tools"
"26 pre-installed extensions" "pre-installed VS Code extensions"

When Exact Counts ARE Needed

Reference tools/registry/count-manifest.json as the single source of truth. Validators auto-compute actual values from filesystem globs defined in that file.

Files allowed to contain counts (the allowlist):

  • tools/registry/count-manifest.json — the manifest itself
  • CHANGELOG.md — historical entries describe what changed at a point in time
  • QUALITY_SCORE.md Change Log column — historical records of state changes
  • Validator script output — computed dynamically, not hard-coded

Workflow Steps

The workflow includes Step 3.5 (Governance) which makes "7 steps" and "8 steps" both technically correct depending on counting method. To eliminate this ambiguity: always say "multi-step workflow" — never count steps.

Read the full file on GitHub · 47 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. 4d ago First seen · 47 lines · 487 tokens per session scan A 66d494458f71

Subscribe to this mod's changes

apex-accelerator no-hardcoded-counts.instructions.md is an instructions file published in the GitHub repository jonathan-vella/apex-accelerator (50 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 487 tokens to every session, about $0.0024 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.

Related

Other instructions, from other repositories