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/hamzaamjad/cursor-rulesWrote 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/hamzaamjad/cursor-rules/302-snmp-monitoring-patterns)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/hamzaamjad/cursor-rules/302-snmp-monitoring-patterns"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/hamzaamjad/cursor-rules/302-snmp-monitoring-patterns/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/hamzaamjad/cursor-rules/302-snmp-monitoring-patterns"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/hamzaamjad/cursor-rules/302-snmp-monitoring-patterns.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 | $0.00000 | $0.01079 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00540 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00216 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00108 |
Grade A, and why
302-snmp-monitoring-patterns 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 12d 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 — 58 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
snmp-monitoring-patterns.mdc
- Purpose: Standardize SNMP network monitoring implementation patterns to prevent common pitfalls and ensure reliable monitoring setup.
- Requirements:
- Interface Discovery First: Always run
snmpwalk -v2c -c [community] [host] 1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.2to get interface descriptions before hardcoding OIDs. Map interface names to indices. - Counter Validation: Test specific OIDs with
snmpgetcommands before implementing continuous monitoring loops. Verify counters are incrementing as expected. - Activity Characterization: Clarify monitoring goals with user:
- Stability: Minimal counter changes, low noise
- Activity: High frequency changes, real-time traffic
- Specific Traffic: WAN, LAN, or application-specific monitoring
- Incremental Testing: Follow progression: single measurement → short interval testing → continuous monitoring
- OID Construction Pattern: Use format
1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.[10|16].[interface_index]where 10=download, 16=upload - Error Handling: Include timeout handling, community string validation, and graceful degradation for unreachable interfaces
- Interface Discovery First: Always run
- Common Interface Patterns:
- WAN Interfaces: switch0, br0, eth0, ppp0
- Bridge Interfaces: br0, br1 (often aggregate traffic)
- VLAN Interfaces: switch0.1, eth0.2 (sub-interfaces)
- Loopback: lo (avoid for WAN monitoring)
- Discovery Optimization Patterns:
- WAN Interface Filtering: Use strict pattern matching (eth0-9, br0-9, specific VLANs) over broad inclusion to reduce 5000+ interfaces to 10-50 candidates
- Discovery vs Monitoring Split: Always clarify whether optimizing discovery speed or monitoring accuracy before implementing
- Interface Ranking: Present discovered interfaces in priority table for user selection rather than automatic optimization
- Batch Validation: Process interface validation in batches of 5 to avoid overwhelming router
- Deduplication: Remove duplicate interface names (common with multiple SNMP indices for same interface)
- IP Address Filtering: Exclude IP addresses (
/^\d+\.\d+\.\d+\.\d+$/) from interface name results - Priority Categories:
- primary_wan (switch0, br0, eth0 + common VLANs) - highest priority
- physical_wan (eth1-9) - physical ports
- bridge_wan (br1-9) - bridge interfaces
- ppp_wan (ppp0+) - PPP connections
- named_wan (wan*, internet*, uplink*) - explicitly named
- Validation:
- Check: Was interface discovery performed before OID hardcoding?
- Check: Were test measurements taken to validate counter behavior?
- Check: Are monitoring goals clearly defined (stability vs activity)?
- Check: Does the implementation handle SNMP errors gracefully?
- Check: For optimization requests, were performance targets and output preferences confirmed upfront?
- Check: Was interface filtering applied to reduce discovery scope to manageable size (10-50 candidates)?
- Check: Were discovered interfaces presented in ranking table for user selection?
- Examples:
- Discovery Command:
snmpwalk -v2c -c public 192.168.1.1 1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.2 - Validation Test:
snmpget -v2c -c public 192.168.1.1 1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.10.4 - Activity Test: Run 3 measurements 2 seconds apart to assess counter change frequency
- Optimization Scope Confirmation: "Target interface count? Acceptable discovery time? Minimal vs detailed output?"
- Interface Ranking Table: Present "1. br0 [primary_wan] - 14M bytes activity, 2. eth4 [physical_wan] - 18M bytes activity" before selecting
- Assumption Echo: "Using strict eth0-9/br0-9 patterns to limit to ~10-50 interfaces...OK?"
- Discovery Command:
- Changes:
- v1.0: Initial version based on bandwidth monitoring retrospective
- v1.1: Added Discovery Optimization Patterns section based on WAN interface filtering task retrospective (reduced 5000+ to 13 interfaces)
- Source References: Retrospective from SNMP bandwidth monitoring implementation task and WAN interface discovery optimization task.
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 58 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 8d3f5afebc66
302-snmp-monitoring-patterns is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository hamzaamjad/cursor-rules (2 stars, last pushed 1y ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,079 tokens. 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
20-angular-services
Angular service rules for wrapping web-serial-rxjs.
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.
cli-error-handling
CLI command error handling patterns.
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.