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/arango-solutions/arango-sparql-pyWrote 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/arango-solutions/arango-sparql-py/wiring-over-deletion)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/arango-solutions/arango-sparql-py/wiring-over-deletion"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/arango-solutions/arango-sparql-py/wiring-over-deletion/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/arango-solutions/arango-sparql-py/wiring-over-deletion"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/arango-solutions/arango-sparql-py/wiring-over-deletion.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 | $0.00484 | $0.00484 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00242 | $0.00242 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00097 | $0.00097 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00048 | $0.00048 |
Grade A, and why
wiring-over-deletion 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 9d 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.
What it actually says
Wiring Over Deletion
"Unused code often represents missing features, not garbage."
When you see a linter warning about an unused import, variable, or parameter, it is NOT a request to delete it. It is a request to finish the implementation.
You are FORBIDDEN from deleting "unused" code without first proving it is truly obsolete.
Decision Matrix
Go
VAR declared but not used→ Log it, return it, or trace it. NEVER_ = scorectx parameter unused→ Passctxto every DB call, HTTP request, or sub-functionerr variable unused→ Handle it:if err != nil { return fmt.Errorf("context: %w", err) }
React/TypeScript
'MyIcon' defined but never used→ Render it where it belongsProp 'isEnabled' defined but never used→ Wire it: conditional rendering, class toggling, or logic gateuseEffect has missing dependencies→ Stabilize the dependency (useCallback,useMemo). NEVEReslint-disable
Imports
'some-lib' imported but never used→ Implement the feature that needs it. NEVER delete just to silence the linter unless the entire feature was scrapped
Tests
Unused write to field→ Assert or log it to prove test setup executedUnused parameter 't'→ Shadow it in sub-tests:t.Run("sub", func(t *testing.T) { ... })
Wire-It Checklist
- Semantic Value — Does the name suggest meaningful data? → Wire to UI/logs
- Structural Integrity — Is it a system parameter (
ctx,config)? → Pass it down - Intent — Was it just added in the previous turn? → IT IS MANDATORY TO USE IT
"A passing linter check on a broken feature is a failure. A failing linter check on a working feature is just a todo."
Do not clean the house by throwing out the furniture.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 42 lines · 484 tokens per session scan A e10112a1b01c
wiring-over-deletion is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository arango-solutions/arango-sparql-py (2 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 484 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 2026-08-31.
Other cursor rules, from other repositories
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.
cli-error-handling
CLI command error handling patterns.
prefer-assertions-over-defensive-checks
Prefer assertions over defensive checks when data is guaranteed to be valid.
prefer-direct-imports-over-module-mocks
Prefer extracting a testable core over vi.mock / vi.resetModules when unit tests need to reach production logic entangled with config, env, or singletons.