Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/danielvm-git/bigpowersnpx agentmods add rules/danielvm-git/bigpowers/audit-codeWrote 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/danielvm-git/bigpowers/audit-code)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/danielvm-git/bigpowers/audit-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/danielvm-git/bigpowers/audit-code/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/danielvm-git/bigpowers/audit-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/danielvm-git/bigpowers/audit-code.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 | $0.00061 | $0.02339 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00024 | $0.00936 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00468 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00234 |
Grade A, and why
audit-code scanned grade A with 1 finding 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.
Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
- [ ] No GitHub REST API called directly (no curl/fetch to api.github.com) How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 184 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Audit Code
HARD GATE — HARD GATE — Audit must check for: bugs (correctness), security, performance, and clarity. Do NOT skip security review if the code touches user data, auth, or external APIs.
Run this self-review before asking anyone else to look at the code. The goal is to catch everything that is clearly wrong or missing — so the reviewer can focus on design and architecture, not hygiene.
Distinct from request-review: This is the coding agent checking its own work. No second agent is involved. Run this first; run request-review after this passes.
Look-here-first (churn heuristic)
Before the checklist, rank changed files by git churn and review high-churn hotspots first — they carry the most latent risk regardless of diff size.
bash scripts/bp-churn-rank.sh --since 90.days --limit 15
Apply the full checklist to churn-ranked files in descending order. Files with zero recent commits but large diffs still get reviewed; churn only sets priority, not scope.
Modes
- Default: full checklist
- --quick: Run only Supply Chain and Test Coverage. Use for changes under 50 LOC.
- --gate: Non-interactive mode for automated CI gating (used by build-epic step 6). Exit with non-zero status code (
exit 1) on ANY checklist failure;exit 0only if ALL items pass. Produces a compact pass/fail summary to stderr. On failure, list every ✗ item with reason. - --parallel: Run checklist sections in isolated git worktrees (e45s18) so concurrent checks cannot corrupt each other's working tree:
bash scripts/lib/parallel-review-worktrees.sh audit-code
Checklist
Supply Chain & Security
- slopcheck run for new dependencies; packages tagged in plan-work:
[OK],[SUS], or[SLOP] - No
[SLOP]packages without documented human approval - No secrets in diff (
sk-,ghp_,AKIA,.envvalues) — seeguard-gitpatterns - OWASP Top 10 spot-check: injection, broken auth, sensitive data exposure, misconfiguration (see
docs/references/security-threats.md) - Security: diff scanned — no unaddressed HIGH findings (or deviations documented in
specs/security/EXCEPTIONS.md)
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 · 184 lines · 61 tokens per session scan A e4dd72ec7c49
audit-code is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository danielvm-git/bigpowers (267 stars, last pushed 27d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 61 tokens to every session and 2,339 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (makes network calls). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-09-03.
Other cursor rules, from other repositories
clean-code
Apply language-agnostic clean-code discipline to all code writing, editing, reviewing, testing, and refactoring, including file placement, single responsibility, and verified completion.
boffin-post-change-audit
Pre-flight review and post-change kernel audit.
refactoring
Refactoring: systematic approach, extract/inline, guard clauses, early returns.
new-pull-request
Use this rule when requested to review a pull request.
ai-security-review
Rule Name: ai-security-review Description: Perform security review for any code that handles user input, authentication, database queries, or external API calls. Filters.
ai-code-review
Rule Name: ai-code-review Description: Always review code for security, performance, correctness, and maintainability before submitting. Filters.