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.
npx agentmods add rules/jkudjo/oh-my-cursor/reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Jkudjo/oh-my-cursorWrote 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/jkudjo/oh-my-cursor/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/jkudjo/oh-my-cursor/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/jkudjo/oh-my-cursor/review.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00016 | $0.00620 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00310 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00124 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00062 |
Grade A, and why
review 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 4d 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 — 84 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
@review
Trigger: Before merging, after implementing a feature, or when asked to review code.
Severity Ratings
| Level | Meaning | Gate |
|---|---|---|
| CRITICAL | Security vulnerability, data loss risk | Must fix before merge |
| HIGH | Bug, broken contract, or major code smell | Should fix before merge |
| MEDIUM | Edge case, missing error handling, minor smell | Fix when possible |
| LOW | Naming, style, minor suggestion | Consider fixing |
Protocol
-
Identify scope — git diff, specified files, or recent changes.
-
For each changed file, review against all categories below. Reference
file:linefor every finding.Security
- SQL/command/HTML injection
- Auth bypass or missing permission checks
- Secrets or tokens in code
- Unvalidated external input used in dangerous operations
- Insecure deserialization or prototype pollution
Correctness
- Logic errors, off-by-one, wrong comparisons
- Null/undefined not handled at boundaries
- Race conditions or shared mutable state
- Incorrect error handling (swallowed errors, wrong status codes)
Performance
- N+1 queries
- Unbounded loops on large inputs
- Missing indexes referenced in queries
- Unnecessary blocking in async code
Design
- Breaking changes to public API or schema
- Tight coupling, missing abstraction boundaries
- Duplicated logic that should be shared
- Functions > 40 lines (flag, don't mandate)
Tests
- New code paths without test coverage
- Edge cases not tested
- Tests that only test the happy path
-
Write the report:
## Code Review: {scope} **Verdict:** PASS | PASS WITH NOTES | FAIL ### Findings **[CRITICAL]** `file:line` — description Fix: specific recommendation **[HIGH]** `file:line` — description Fix: ... ### Summary Critical: N | High: N | Medium: N | Low: N- FAIL if any CRITICAL or HIGH findings exist
- PASS WITH NOTES if only MEDIUM/LOW
- PASS if none
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 84 lines · 16 tokens per session scan A 1fb97529fa31
review is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository Jkudjo/oh-my-cursor (1 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 16 tokens to every session and 620 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 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 2026-08-31.
Other cursor rules, from other repositories
implementation-workflow
Required plan-first workflow for any implementation request (steps 1–5).
memory-bank
You are an expert software engineer with a unique characteristic: your memory resets completely between sessions. This isn't a limitation - it's what drives you to maintain perfect documentation. At the beginning of each dialogue, you rely ENTIRELY on your Memory Bank to understand the project and continue work…
general
You are running in Cursor IDE. The tools of the MCP server that you are developing are connected to this IDE. When you've modified the code and want to use updated functionality, you must prompt the user to reload the server first.
create-rule-agent
This rule is responsible for creating and updating Cursor rules. Cursor rules govern the structure, hierarchy, style and organization of code in a project. This rule should be invoked in Agent mode when: 1. a user wants to create a new cursor rule, 2. a user wants to update or change an existing rule, 3. user wants…
cloudflare-workers-hono-auto
Cloudflare Workers with Hono framework development standards and best practices.
cloudflare-workers-auto
Cloudflare Workers development standards and best practices.