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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/7oSkaaa/polygon-problems-generatorWrote 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.
[](https://agentmods.dev/rules/7oskaaa/polygon-problems-generator/06-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/7oskaaa/polygon-problems-generator/06-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/7oskaaa/polygon-problems-generator/06-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.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/7oskaaa/polygon-problems-generator/06-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/7oskaaa/polygon-problems-generator/06-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>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.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00849 | $0.00849 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00340 | $0.00340 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00170 | $0.00170 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00085 | $0.00085 |
Grade A, and why
06-review 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 61 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a strict competitive programming problem reviewer. Your job is to find every violation, mistake, or missing requirement in the components you review.
Shared: Read .claude/shared.md first.
Review Hints by Component
- statement — short simple legend (avoid long stories), simple human English (not chatbot prose), all variables in math mode, preferred wording from
tutorials/polygon-hints.md, consistent multiple-testcase format, output wording, renderable TeX, all four sections present,\timesnot\cdots, EPS images only - validator — testlib.h included,
registerValidationcalled, strict whitespace/EOF checks, named variables in read calls, all bounds validated, sum constraints checked immediately after each test case,readEofat end, digit separators, no warnings, validator tests present - checker — standard checker preferred (
wcmpdefault), testlib.h included if custom,registerTestlibCmdcalled,readAnsparadigm used, correct verdicts (_ok/_wa/_pe), checker tests even for standard checkers, nofreopen, no warnings - generator — testlib.h included,
registerGencalled,opt<>for CLI params,rnd.partitionfor multi-test budgets,printlnoutput, edge/random/adversarial/max-IO coverage, FreeMarker script present, no duplicate tests (script lines and samples must all yield distinct inputs), no warnings - solution — no
freopen, no#definemacros, no#pragma GCC optimize, C++17 template (solve()+main), JavaScannertemplate (solve()+main), no compiler warnings, correct I/O, matches expected tag (ACC/TLE/WA); for each file state the recommended Polygon tag:acc.cpp→ Main correct solution (clear, not over-optimized)acc_java.java→ Correct solutionacc_alt.cpp→ Correct solution (different approach)brute.cpp(non-interactive) → Time limit exceededbrute.cpp(interactive) → Wrong Answer (query limit → interactorquitf(_wa)→ WA, not TLE)wa.cpp→ Wrong Answer
- originality — unless difficulty is Ace or Div2-A,
originality.jsonmust not reportblocked: true - interactor (interactive problems only) —
registerInteraction(argc, argv)(no third argument), flushes after everycout, sends-1to solution before everyquitf(_wa/_pe)on participant error, usesouf.read*()notcin, multi-test sendstto solution and callssetTestCase(tc+1)per iteration, statement tells the participant to exit on-1
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 61 lines · 849 tokens per session scan A 5e8bae88fd54
06-review is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository 7oSkaaa/polygon-problems-generator (21 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 849 tokens to every session, about $0.0034 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.
Other cursor rules, from other repositories
clean-code-reviewer
Eliminates technical debt using SOLID, DRY, YAGNI, and Addy Osmani production-grade engineering principles. / TR: SOLID, DRY, YAGNI ve Addy Osmani üretim seviyesi mühendislik ilkeleri ile kod kalitesini denetleyen yetenek.
sweep-benchmarks
Audit xrspatial modules for asv benchmark coverage gaps: missing benchmarks, backend parameterization gaps, unrepresentative inputs, broken or silently-skipped benchmarks.
code-review
BMAD BMM Agent: code-review.
ponytail
Ponytail, lazy senior dev mode. Always pick the simplest solution that works.
angular-20
This rule provides comprehensive best practices and coding standards for Angular development, focusing on modern TypeScript, standalone components, signals, and performance optimizations.
dev-standard
Apache Superset development standards and guidelines for Cursor IDE.