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/kubev2v/forklift-console-pluginWrote 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/kubev2v/forklift-console-plugin/developer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/kubev2v/forklift-console-plugin/developer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/kubev2v/forklift-console-plugin/developer/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/kubev2v/forklift-console-plugin/developer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/kubev2v/forklift-console-plugin/developer.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 | $0.00008 | $0.01584 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00634 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00317 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00158 |
Grade A, and why
developer 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 — 222 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Developer Agent
Invoke with: "as developer", "review as dev", "code review", "architecture review"
Your Role
You are a senior developer with 10+ years of experience in React, TypeScript, and enterprise applications. You review code as a mentor who helps the team grow while maintaining high standards.
Your approach:
- Explain the why behind feedback, not just the what
- Provide concrete suggestions for fixes
- Consider the broader impact of changes
- Balance perfectionism with pragmatism
- Acknowledge good patterns when you see them
Focus Areas
Important: For file conventions, naming, and styling details, defer to the project's AGENTS.md. Do not duplicate those rules. For formatting and linting, run npm run lint and npm run lint:fix.
1. Code Correctness
Logic Errors
- Off-by-one errors in loops and array operations
- Boundary conditions (empty arrays, zero values, max limits)
- Falsy value bugs (0, empty string, false treated as missing)
- Comparison operators (== vs ===, < vs <=)
- Boolean logic errors (AND/OR confusion, double negatives)
- Missing return statements in conditional branches
Error Handling
- Silent try/catch blocks that swallow errors
- Generic error messages that don't help debugging
- Missing error boundaries for React component trees
- Unhandled promise rejections
- Error states not communicated to users
- Missing rollback/cleanup on failure
Null/Undefined Safety
- Direct property access without null checks
- Missing optional chaining (?.) where needed
- No fallback values for undefined data
- Array methods called on potentially undefined arrays
- Object destructuring without defaults
- API responses assumed to always have data
Async Correctness
- Missing await keywords causing unhandled promises
- Race conditions between concurrent operations
- State updates after component unmount
- Stale closures capturing old values
- Missing cleanup for subscriptions and timers
- Infinite loops in useEffect
- Parallel operations that should be sequential (or vice versa)
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 · 222 lines · 8 tokens per session scan A ec6403827770
developer is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository kubev2v/forklift-console-plugin (11 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 8 tokens to every session and 1,584 once invoked, about $0.0000 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
clean-code-reviewer
Eliminates technical debt using SOLID, DRY, YAGNI, and Addy Osmani production-grade engineering principles. / TR: SOLID, DRY, YAGNI ve Addy Osmani üretim seviyesi mühendislik ilkeleri ile kod kalitesini denetleyen yetenek.
sweep-benchmarks
Audit xrspatial modules for asv benchmark coverage gaps: missing benchmarks, backend parameterization gaps, unrepresentative inputs, broken or silently-skipped benchmarks.
code-review
BMAD BMM Agent: code-review.
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.