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/kaptinlin/gozodWrote 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/kaptinlin/gozod/coding-standards)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/kaptinlin/gozod/coding-standards"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/kaptinlin/gozod/coding-standards/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/kaptinlin/gozod/coding-standards"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/kaptinlin/gozod/coding-standards.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 | $0.05807 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.02323 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.01161 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00581 |
Grade A, and why
coding-standards 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 — 553 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
GoZod Coding Standards and Best Practices
This document defines comprehensive coding standards and best practices for the GoZod validation library. It provides guiding principles for implementing Go code that ensures full compatibility with the TypeScript Zod v4 API while following Go language idioms and performance optimization principles.
🎯 Core Design Philosophy
1. Smart Type Inference First
- Input-Output Consistency: Output the same type as input
- Preserve Go Type Inference Advantages:
String().Parse("hello")→string,String().Parse(&"hello")→*string - Nilable Modifier Semantics: Only changes handling of
nil, doesn't change type inference logic - Avoid Type Coercion: Let Go's type system work naturally
- Compile-time Type Safety: Use type system to prevent incorrect usage at compile time
2. Full TypeScript Zod v4 Correspondence
- Complete API Compatibility: Maintain the same method signatures, parameters, and return value structures
- Behavioral Consistency: Same input produces same output
- Error Handling Correspondence: Error types and messages correspond to TypeScript version
- Field Naming Consistency: Use the same naming conventions as JS version
3. Go Language Idioms
- Use Go 1.26+ Features: Fully utilize generics, Swiss Tables,
new(expr), self-referential constraints, and performance optimizations - Follow Go Conventions: Error handling, naming conventions, package organization
- Value Types First: Use value types rather than pointer types for struct fields
- Zero-Allocation Optimization: Avoid memory allocation when possible
new(expr)for pointer creation: Usenew(expr)instead oftmp := expr; &tmpto create pointers from expressions- Compile-time constraint verification: All schema types must satisfy
core.Describableandcore.Refineable(verified intypes/constraints_verify.go)
4. Avoid Over-Engineering
- Simplified Implementation: Direct inlining rather than complex function wrapping
- Remove Unnecessary Wrapping: Avoid intermediate variables and wrapper functions
- Unified Patterns: Use consistent design patterns, avoid special cases
- Progressive Complexity: Start simple, add complexity as needed
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 · 553 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 6cb4dcc511f0
coding-standards is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository kaptinlin/gozod (25 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 5,807 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 2026-08-30.
Other cursor rules, from other repositories
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.
backend
You are an expert in Go, Gin, Gorm, Gen, Cosy (https://cosy.uozi.org/) with a deep understanding of best practices and performance optimization techniques in these technologies.
code-style
Formatting, lint, comments language.
20-testing-generated-and-structure
Testing expectations, generated-file boundaries, and CLI structure contract.
shared-libraries
Shared libraries - condition framework, inventory containers, file-backed DB, itinerary, references.
go
Go conventions for all Zapstore Go projects (zsp, server, zindex, zapstore-cli).