Awesome-Prompt-Engineering: Instructions file for GitHub Copilot

.github/instructions/contribution-review.instructions.md

Awesome-Prompt-Engineering contribution-review.instructions.md is an instructions file for GitHub Copilot from natnew/Awesome-Prompt-Engineering. It costs 403 tokens per session, scanned A, original, MIT.

Instructions for reviewing pull requests and issues in a community list of prompts for engineering. A pull request is a proposed code or documentation change for maintainers to review.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to check relevance, links, duplicates, placement, rationale, tone, and promotional content while writing concise maintainer responses.
Why use it?
It provides consistent decisions and wording for accepting, correcting, requesting changes, declining, or postponing submissions.

Instructions file for GitHub Copilot

Written for GitHub Copilot: a Copilot instructions file.

This is natnew/Awesome-Prompt-Engineering's own configuration. It tells GitHub Copilot how to work on Awesome-Prompt-Engineering itself, so it is not a mod to install elsewhere. Copy it as a starting point and replace the rules that are about this project. Everything Awesome-Prompt-Engineering configures →

Reuse

Borrowing it

Nothing to install: this file belongs to natnew/Awesome-Prompt-Engineering. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.

Copy the file
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/natnew/Awesome-Prompt-Engineering/main/.github/instructions/contribution-review.instructions.md
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/natnew/Awesome-Prompt-Engineering

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 Awesome-Prompt-Engineering contribution-review.instructions.md

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/instructions/natnew/awesome-prompt-engineering/contribution-review/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/instructions/natnew/awesome-prompt-engineering/contribution-review)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/instructions/natnew/awesome-prompt-engineering/contribution-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/instructions/natnew/awesome-prompt-engineering/contribution-review/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>

Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.

agentmods 80×15 button for Awesome-Prompt-Engineering contribution-review.instructions.md

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/instructions/natnew/awesome-prompt-engineering/contribution-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/instructions/natnew/awesome-prompt-engineering/contribution-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 403 This file is loaded in full into every session.
When invoked 403 The same file — it is already loaded in full.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
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 5.1 $0.00403 $0.00403
Opus 5.5 $0.00161 $0.00161
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00081 $0.00081
Haiku 4.5 $0.00040 $0.00040

Measured 1mo ago against content hash 14e0c12fb7c2, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

Awesome-Prompt-Engineering contribution-review.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 1mo 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/contribution-review.instructions.md · 43 lines

What it actually says

Reviewing pull requests and issues

This is a community list. Reviews should keep the bar high while staying welcoming and low-friction. Use a calm, respectful tone.

Tone

  • Thank the contributor for their time.
  • Be concise and specific. When something needs changing, name the rule and link the relevant guide (Contributing.md, Workflow.md).
  • Never gatekeep harshly. Assume good faith.

How to respond

  • Accept when the entry is relevant, the link is a canonical HTTPS source, the description follows the rules, it sits in the right category, and it is not a duplicate.
  • Fix small issues yourself (wording, casing, trailing whitespace, hyphen vs em dash, slightly-off placement) rather than asking the contributor to re-push.
  • Request changes only when the contributor's input is genuinely needed: a broken or duplicate link, missing rationale for why it beats an existing entry, unrelated changes bundled together, or an objective rule they should correct.
  • Decline politely when a submission is promotional or self-promotion only, out of scope, or below the quality and maturity bar. Give a one-line reason and stay warm.
  • Park borderline or promising-but-premature submissions (for example, a young project that may later clear the star threshold) rather than closing hard.

Explaining quality concerns

State the concern plainly and briefly, point to the specific guideline, and where possible suggest the concrete fix. Keep the contributor's path back to acceptance clear.

Maintainer judgement

Produce a recommendation and, if helpful, the concrete edit. Leave the actual merge or close to the human maintainer. When unsure, flag it rather than deciding.

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. 1mo ago First seen · 43 lines · 403 tokens per session scan A 14e0c12fb7c2

Subscribe to this mod's changes

Awesome-Prompt-Engineering contribution-review.instructions.md is an instructions file published in the GitHub repository natnew/Awesome-Prompt-Engineering (114 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 403 tokens to every session, about $0.0016 per session on Opus 5.5. 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