google-style-docstrings

google-style-docstrings is a cursor rule for Cursor from LuthienResearch/luthien_control. It costs 455 tokens per session, scanned A, original, no licence file.

Google-style docstring guidelines for documenting Python classes and public functions.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use them when writing or updating documentation inside Python source files.
Why use it?
They keep code documentation consistent and make public interfaces easier to understand.

Cursor rule for Cursor

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add rules/luthienresearch/luthien_control/google-style-docstrings
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/LuthienResearch/luthien_control

Made for: Cursor.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for google-style-docstrings

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/luthienresearch/luthien_control/google-style-docstrings.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/rules/luthienresearch/luthien_control/google-style-docstrings)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/luthienresearch/luthien_control/google-style-docstrings"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/luthienresearch/luthien_control/google-style-docstrings.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 455 This file is loaded in full into every session.
When invoked 455 The same file — it is already loaded in full.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin unknown No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00455 $0.00455
Opus 5 $0.00228 $0.00228
Sonnet 5 $0.00091 $0.00091
Haiku 4.5 $0.00046 $0.00046

Measured 3d ago against content hash 3315df56a304, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

google-style-docstrings 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 3d 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.

.cursor/rules/google-style-docstrings.mdc · 73 lines

The source is not reproduced here

No licence file

A repository with no LICENSE is all rights reserved by default, so the body is not copied here. The metadata, the measurements and the link are.

Read it on GitHub

Changes

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.

  1. 3d ago First seen · 73 lines · 455 tokens per session scan A 3315df56a304

Subscribe to this mod's changes

google-style-docstrings is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository LuthienResearch/luthien_control (12 stars, last pushed 9mo ago), with no licence file. It adds 455 tokens to every session, about $0.0023 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 2026-08-30.