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/ethpandaops/spamoornpx agentmods add rules/ethpandaops/spamoor/development_workflowWrote 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/ethpandaops/spamoor/development_workflow)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/ethpandaops/spamoor/development_workflow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/ethpandaops/spamoor/development_workflow/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/ethpandaops/spamoor/development_workflow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/ethpandaops/spamoor/development_workflow.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 | $0.00007 | $0.00967 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00387 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00193 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00097 |
Grade A, and why
development_workflow 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 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.
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 — 178 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Spamoor Development Workflow
Build System
Makefile Targets
make all: Build documentation and binariesmake build: Build binaries with optimizationsmake build-lib: Build using library mode (without replace directive)make docs: Generate Swagger API documentationmake test: Run all testsmake clean: Clean build artifacts
Build Configuration
- CGO_ENABLED=1: Required for SQLite and cryptographic operations
- Build tags: Use
with_blob_v1,ckzgfor blob transaction support - Optimization flags:
-s -wfor stripped binaries - Version injection: Git commit hash and build time embedded
Development Environment
Local Development
# Standard development setup
git clone https://github.com/ethpandaops/spamoor.git
cd spamoor
make all
# Run tests
make test
# Generate documentation
make docs
DevNet Testing
# Start local devnet
make devnet
# Run spamoor against devnet
make devnet-run
# Clean up devnet
make devnet-clean
Git Workflow
Branch Strategy
- master: Main development branch
- feature/*: New features and enhancements
- fix/*: Bug fixes
- docs/*: Documentation updates
Commit Standards
- Use conventional commit format:
type(scope): description - Types:
feat,fix,docs,refactor,test,chore - Include issue references when applicable
- Keep commits atomic and focused
Pull Request Process
- Create feature branch from master
- Implement changes with tests
- Update documentation if needed
- Ensure all tests pass
- Submit PR with clear description
- Address review feedback
- Squash and merge when approved
Testing Strategy
Unit Testing
- Test individual functions and methods
- Mock external dependencies (RPC clients, databases)
- Use table-driven tests for multiple scenarios
- Aim for good coverage of business logic
Integration Testing
- Test complete scenarios end-to-end
- Use local devnet for blockchain interactions
- Verify transaction generation and submission
- Test daemon API endpoints
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 · 178 lines · 7 tokens per session scan A aaef510c2d84
development_workflow is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository ethpandaops/spamoor (80 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 7 tokens to every session and 967 once invoked, about $0.0000 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 2026-08-30.
Other cursor rules, from other repositories
mockery
Mockery Mock Generation Rules.
general
General rules for Claude Code when working on go-crypto-wallet.
gonavi-go
A Go coding rule set for the GoNavi repository, based on common Go style guides and the project's own conventions. It covers file structure, errors, context, concurrency, logging, and tests.
go
Idiomatic Go rules. Explicit error handling, interface-based design, context-first concurrency.
20-testing-generated-and-structure
Testing expectations, generated-file boundaries, and CLI structure contract.
typecheck
After TS edits, run tsc in the touched package; a green test run is not tsc.