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/kunalsuri/ai-fication-kitWrote 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/kunalsuri/ai-fication-kit/review-agent-config)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/kunalsuri/ai-fication-kit/review-agent-config"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/kunalsuri/ai-fication-kit/review-agent-config.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 5.1 | $0.00041 | $0.01299 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00649 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00260 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00130 |
Grade A, and why
review-agent-config 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 8d 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 — 104 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Run the review-agent-config diagnostic. Read-only. Produce a structured findings report; do NOT edit any file.
Inputs — read these files (and only these)
CLAUDE.md(project root) — full readAGENTS.md(project root) — full readpackage.json(project root) — grep for"build"and"test"script keys onlypom.xml(project root, if present) — grep<build>section onlyai/guide/MODULE_MAP.md— check existence on disk; no deep read neededai/INDEX.md— check existence on disk; no deep read needed- Any
ai/guide/*.mdpaths referenced in the knowledge-map sections — existence check only via a file search
Checks
Section A — CLAUDE.md structure
| ID | Check | Severity |
|---|---|---|
| C1 | Contains the literal @AGENTS.md directive (not just a comment or a markdown link [AGENTS.md](AGENTS.md)) |
❌ |
| C2 | Has a "Hard rules" or equivalent section | ❌ |
| C3 | Has a "Where to look" or knowledge-map section with explicit pointers into ai/guide/ |
❌ |
| C4 | Has a token-discipline or subagent-delegation section | ⚠️ |
| C5 | No unfilled placeholders: regex <[a-zA-Z ]{3,}>, bare TODO, or the literal string fill in |
❌ |
| C6 | Build command is present and not a placeholder | ❌ |
| C7 | Test command is present and not a placeholder | ❌ |
| C8 | Test locations are filled in (not <fill in during cold start> or equivalent) |
❌ |
| C9 | No reference to CLAUDE_bkp_*.md files framed as active guidance (stale post-cold-start) |
⚠️ |
| C10 | No Claude-specific directives duplicated wholesale from AGENTS.md | ⚠️ |
Section B — AGENTS.md structure
| ID | Check | Severity |
|---|---|---|
| A1 | Contains no Claude Code-specific directives (@import, memory syntax, hook syntax) |
⚠️ |
| A2 | Hard rule present: frozen upstream / don't touch inherited code | ❌ |
| A3 | Hard rule present: test before done — with actual build and test commands | ❌ |
| A4 | Hard rule present: surgical diffs | ❌ |
| A5 | Hard rule present: provenance tagging ([inferred] / [verified]) |
❌ |
| A6 | Hard rule present: no phantom bugs / config churn | ❌ |
| A7 | Hard rule present: verify claims before declaring done | ❌ |
| A8 | Hard rule present: license-header matching for new files | ⚠️ |
| A9 | Has a knowledge-map section pointing to ai/guide/ |
❌ |
| A10 | No unfilled placeholders (same regex as C5) | ❌ |
| A11 | No reference to AGENTS_bkp_*.md files framed as active guidance |
⚠️ |
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 104 lines · 41 tokens per session scan A 5d1726b0959e
review-agent-config is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository kunalsuri/ai-fication-kit (3 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 41 tokens to every session and 1,299 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
techdebt
Find and eliminate technical debt across the whole codebase — duplicated code, dead code, redundant abstractions.
adversarial-code-reviewer
Acts as a senior 'Devil's Advocate' code auditor inspecting showstoppers, memory leaks, unhandled exceptions, and security gaps before code delivery. / TR: Yazılan kodu teslim etmeden önce 'Şeytanın Avukatı' gözüyle gizli bug, showstopper, bellek kaçağı ve mimari açıkları arayan denetçi.
kandev-pr-fixup
Kandev PR fixup workflow prompt for Cursor agents.
refactor-cleaner
Dead code cleanup and consolidation specialist. Use PROACTIVELY for removing unused code, duplicates, and refactoring. Runs analysis tools (knip, depcheck, ts-prune) to identify dead code and safely removes it.
ai-dev-os-review
Performs a comprehensive self-review before creating a PR. Combines guideline compliance checking (L3) with design-level review (L2) and philosophical alignment (L1). Unlike @ai-dev-os-check which only checks rules, this also evaluates architecture decisions and code design quality.
ponytail
Ponytail, lazy senior dev mode. Always pick the simplest solution that works.