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/jahands/promptsWrote 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/jahands/prompts/testing-strategy)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/jahands/prompts/testing-strategy"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/jahands/prompts/testing-strategy/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/jahands/prompts/testing-strategy"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/jahands/prompts/testing-strategy.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 | $0.00022 | $0.01658 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00663 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00332 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00166 |
Grade A, and why
testing-strategy 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 — 262 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Guidelines for writing maintainable, reliable tests across all levels - from unit tests to integration tests. Emphasizes test structure, naming clarity, appropriate mocking, and effective test data management.
const userData = createUserData({ email: '[email protected]' });
passwordHasher.hash.mockResolvedValue('hashed-password');
// Act
const result = await service.createUser(userData);
// Assert
expect(result.email).toBe('[email protected]');
expect(passwordHasher.hash).toHaveBeenCalledWith(userData.password);
expect(mockRepository.save).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
expect.objectContaining({ password: 'hashed-password' })
);
});
}); });
</example>
<example type="integration-test">
```typescript
describe('User API Integration', () => {
let app: Application;
let database: TestDatabase;
beforeAll(async () => {
database = await TestDatabase.create();
app = createApp(database);
});
afterAll(async () => {
await database.cleanup();
});
describe('POST /users', () => {
it('User_Registration_CreatesUserAndReturnsToken', async () => {
// Arrange
const newUser = {
email: '[email protected]',
password: 'SecurePass123!',
name: 'Test User'
};
// Act
const response = await request(app)
.post('/users')
.send(newUser);
// Assert
expect(response.status).toBe(201);
expect(response.body).toMatchObject({
user: { email: newUser.email, name: newUser.name },
token: expect.any(String)
});
// Verify persistence
const savedUser = await database.users.findByEmail(newUser.email);
expect(savedUser).toBeDefined();
expect(savedUser.password).not.toBe(newUser.password); // Should be hashed
});
});
});
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 · 262 lines · 22 tokens per session scan A e5787dcd1c7f
testing-strategy is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository jahands/prompts (19 stars, last pushed 12d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 22 tokens to every session and 1,658 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
use-contract-ir-factories
Use factory functions for creating ContractIR objects instead of manual object creation.
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.
workflow-level3
Defines the standard workflow for Level 3 (Intermediate Feature) tasks, guiding through comprehensive planning, targeted creative design, structured implementation, detailed reflection, and feature-specific archiving.
reflection-basic
Basic reflection format for Level 2 Simple Enhancement tasks.
rule-calling-guide
Comprehensive guide for calling VAN QA rules.
common-fixes
Utility for VAN QA common validation fixes.