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/brendadeeznuts1111/betting-brain-v3Wrote 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/brendadeeznuts1111/betting-brain-v3/coverage-thresholds)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/brendadeeznuts1111/betting-brain-v3/coverage-thresholds"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/brendadeeznuts1111/betting-brain-v3/coverage-thresholds/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/brendadeeznuts1111/betting-brain-v3/coverage-thresholds"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/brendadeeznuts1111/betting-brain-v3/coverage-thresholds.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 | $0.00000 | $0.00780 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00312 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00156 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00078 |
Grade A, and why
coverage-thresholds 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 2mo 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 — 119 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Coverage Threshold Rules
Dual Threshold System
This codebase uses dual coverage thresholds to balance:
- Strict production standards
- Flexible analytics testing
Main Suite: 80% Coverage (Strict)
# bunfig.toml
coverage = false # coverage off by default
coverageThreshold = 0.8 # 80% for production code
Analytics Suite: 0% Coverage (Flexible)
# bunfig.analytics.toml
coverage = true
coverageThreshold = 0 # No threshold for analytics tests
Package.json Scripts
Main Suite Commands
{
"test": "bun test --randomize",
"test:coverage": "bun test --coverage --randomize"
}
Analytics Suite Commands
{
"analytics:test": "bun test tests/unit/analytics-testing-example.test.ts --randomize",
"analytics:test:coverage": "bun test --coverage --randomize tests/unit/analytics-testing-example.test.ts --config bunfig.analytics.toml",
"analytics:ci": "CI=true bun run analytics:test:coverage"
}
Why Dual Thresholds?
Production Code (80% threshold)
- Purpose: Ensure high-quality, well-tested production code
- Scope: All business logic, API endpoints, core functionality
- Enforcement: CI fails if coverage < 80%
Analytics Code (0% threshold)
- Purpose: Allow rapid iteration on analytics utilities
- Scope: Test helpers, stubs, analytics-specific utilities
- Enforcement: No coverage requirement, focus on functionality
Configuration Hierarchy
bunfig.toml (root)
↓ (always takes precedence for critical settings)
--config flag
↓ (limited override capability)
Environment variables
↓ (minimal support)
Best Practices
✅ Do These
- Keep main threshold at 80% for production quality
- Use analytics config only for analytics tests
- Document threshold rationale in commit messages
- Test both thresholds in CI
❌ Don't Do These
- Lower main threshold below 80%
- Use analytics config for production code
- Mix threshold configurations
- Ignore coverage failures in main suite
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 119 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A d4a42222041e
coverage-thresholds is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository brendadeeznuts1111/betting-brain-v3 (8 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 780 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 cursor rules, from other repositories
typescript-imports
Golden rule: import each symbol from the module that defines it. A package index.ts may barrel only its own ./ modules — never another package.
use-contract-ir-factories
Use factory functions for creating ContractIR objects instead of manual object creation.
prefer-to-throw
Use expect().toThrow() instead of manual try/catch blocks in tests.
upgrade-tests
// ✅ CORRECT: Upgrade package pattern await using ctx = testReactResource(appRouter, { server: { // server configuration }, client(opts) { return { links: [ httpLink({ url: opts.httpUrl, // client configuration }), ], }; }, }).
omit-should-in-tests
Enforce omitting "should" in test descriptions.
docs
All documentation files use MDX format with a specific structure.