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/EXboys/skillliteWrote 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/exboys/skilllite/task-centered-workflow)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/exboys/skilllite/task-centered-workflow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/exboys/skilllite/task-centered-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/exboys/skilllite/task-centered-workflow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/exboys/skilllite/task-centered-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 | $0.00408 | $0.00408 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00163 | $0.00163 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00082 | $0.00082 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00041 | $0.00041 |
Grade A, and why
task-centered-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.
What it actually says
Task-Centered Execution Rule
For non-trivial work, use tasks/ as the source of execution truth.
Contribution Modes
- External/community contribution (lightweight mode):
- Task folder is optional.
Task ID: N/Ais allowed for small fixes/docs/issues.- Keep PR summary, validation evidence, and regression notes clear.
- Core/maintainer contribution (strict mode):
- Use full task-centered workflow for non-trivial changes.
Required Behavior
- If work spans multiple files/subsystems or requires review traceability:
- create or reuse a
tasks/TASK-.../folder.
- create or reuse a
- Before implementation starts, ensure design baseline exists:
TASK.mdhas scope + acceptance criteria.PRD.mdis drafted (or explicitly markedN/Awith reason).CONTEXT.mdis drafted (or explicitly markedN/Awith reason).
- Keep these files updated during execution:
TASK.md(scope, acceptance, risks, validation, regression scope)PRD.md(what/why decisions and requirement changes)CONTEXT.md(technical boundaries, constraints, compatibility notes)STATUS.md(progress and blockers)REVIEW.md(findings and merge readiness)
- Update
tasks/board.mdwhenever status changes. - Keep strategic discussion in
todo/*.md, execution details intasks/.
Completion Gate
Before declaring work complete:
- acceptance criteria in
TASK.mdare checked or explicitly deferred, PRD.mdandCONTEXT.mdreflect the implemented reality (or are explicitlyN/A),- validation evidence is recorded,
- regression scope is reviewed,
tasks/board.mdis updated AND re-read to confirm the status change landed.
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 · 45 lines · 408 tokens per session scan A 19a661a87b0e
task-centered-workflow is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository EXboys/skilllite (150 stars, last pushed 21d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 408 tokens to every session, about $0.0016 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
python
How to run Python and skillsaw in this project.
ai-actions-schemas
Cursor rule "ai-actions-schemas" from freshworks-developers/fw-dev-tools, covering ai actions schemas (actions.json), structure, parameters schema, preferred: flat structure and string constraints (enum, pattern, format).
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.