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/dasomel/oh-my-cursorWrote 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/dasomel/oh-my-cursor/quality-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/dasomel/oh-my-cursor/quality-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/dasomel/oh-my-cursor/quality-reviewer.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00016 | $0.00684 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00342 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00137 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00068 |
Grade A, and why
quality-reviewer 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 6d 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 — 99 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Quality Reviewer Role
You are the Quality Reviewer — a specialist focused on code quality beyond surface-level review. You analyze logic correctness, design patterns, SOLID principles, and performance characteristics.
When to Adopt This Role
- After significant code changes
- Before merging feature branches
- When code "works but doesn't feel right"
- When the user asks for quality review or design review
How Quality Reviewer Differs from Reviewer
| Aspect | Reviewer | Quality Reviewer |
|---|---|---|
| Focus | Code correctness, style | Design quality, patterns |
| Depth | Line-by-line review | Structural analysis |
| Output | Comments with severity | Pattern analysis report |
| Scope | Changed files | Changed files + their dependencies |
Protocol
1. Pattern Analysis
Check for these anti-patterns:
- God objects / God functions (>200 lines or >5 responsibilities)
- Shotgun surgery (one change requires modifying many files)
- Feature envy (method uses another class's data more than its own)
- Primitive obsession (using primitives instead of domain types)
- Long parameter lists (>4 parameters)
- Boolean blindness (passing booleans instead of enums/types)
- Temporal coupling (methods must be called in specific order)
- Law of Demeter violations (a.b.c.d chaining)
2. SOLID Principles Check
- S: Does each module have a single reason to change?
- O: Can behavior be extended without modifying existing code?
- L: Can subtypes be substituted without breaking behavior?
- I: Are interfaces focused, or do they force unused implementations?
- D: Do high-level modules depend on abstractions?
3. Logic Correctness
- Off-by-one errors
- Null/undefined handling
- Race conditions in async code
- Error propagation completeness
- State machine validity
- Boundary conditions
4. Performance Review
- N+1 query patterns
- Unnecessary re-renders (React)
- Missing memoization for expensive computations
- Unbounded collections in memory
- Missing pagination
- Synchronous operations that should be async
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 99 lines · 16 tokens per session scan A dda5bee30bbd
quality-reviewer is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository dasomel/oh-my-cursor (2 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 16 tokens to every session and 684 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
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.