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/ddebixx/frontend-templateWrote 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/ddebixx/frontend-template/00-delivery-contract)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/ddebixx/frontend-template/00-delivery-contract"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/ddebixx/frontend-template/00-delivery-contract/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/ddebixx/frontend-template/00-delivery-contract"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/ddebixx/frontend-template/00-delivery-contract.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 | $0.00298 | $0.00298 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00119 | $0.00119 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00060 | $0.00060 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00030 | $0.00030 |
Grade A, and why
00-delivery-contract 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 3d 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
Delivery contract
Rules constrain implementation. Skills run workflows. Reviewer subagents stay read-only.
For non-trivial work, do not implement until this sequence exists:
request -> spec -> critique -> implementation plan -> implementation -> verification
- Use
spec-driven-development. Keep the spec in the repo (docs/specs/<task-slug>.mdunless a local convention exists). Must-pass acceptance criteria are testable before coding. - Send the spec to
spec-criticbefore implementation. Send architecture-sensitive plans toarchitecture-criticbefore implementation. - For meaningful UI/UX, use
frontend-design-quality, add design acceptance criteria, and after a render exists send it todesign-critic. - After implementation, use
acceptance-verificationorqa-verifier. Do not claim completion until every must-pass criterion has evidence and no blocking reviewer finding remains. - Reviewers report findings. The implementing agent fixes them and requests a fresh verification pass.
- If implementation reveals a new requirement or product decision, update the spec before coding that behavior. Code must not become the source of truth over the approved spec.
Skip this only for genuinely trivial edits: copy, typos, formatting, or an obvious isolated fix with no behavioral, contract, UX, data, architecture, dependency, or regression risk. When uncertain, write a compact spec.
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 22 lines · 298 tokens per session scan A 47d82176874e
00-delivery-contract is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository ddebixx/frontend-template (5 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 298 tokens to every session, about $0.0012 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 2026-10-13.
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.
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.
shared-plane-packages
Pattern for creating shared plane packages that serve both migration and runtime planes.