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/Luxvil/ai-coding-rulesWrote 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/luxvil/ai-coding-rules/71-git-workflow)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/luxvil/ai-coding-rules/71-git-workflow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/luxvil/ai-coding-rules/71-git-workflow/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/luxvil/ai-coding-rules/71-git-workflow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/luxvil/ai-coding-rules/71-git-workflow.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 | $0.00011 | $0.00197 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00079 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00039 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00020 |
Grade A, and why
71-git-workflow 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to 71-git-workflow — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
What it actually says
Git Workflow Rules
Commit Messages
- Use conventional commits:
type(scope): message - Types: feat, fix, docs, style, refactor, test, chore
- Keep subject line <72 characters
- Add body for complex changes
Branch Naming
feature/- new featuresfix/- bug fixesrefactor/- code improvementsdocs/- documentation only
Best Practices
- Commit early and often (checkpoints)
- Never commit secrets or credentials
- Don't commit generated files
- Keep commits atomic (one logical change)
- Write meaningful commit messages
Pull Requests
- Reference related issues
- Include testing instructions
- Keep PRs focused and reviewable
- Request reviews from relevant team members
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 · 34 lines · 11 tokens per session scan A bc10f5803494
71-git-workflow is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository Luxvil/ai-coding-rules (3 stars, last pushed 20d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 11 tokens to every session and 197 once invoked, about $0.0000 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to 71-git-workflow, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other cursor rules, from other repositories
code-migration
Guidelines for ensuring all references are updated when moving files or directories. Covers code references, configuration files, documentation, and verification steps.
git-author
Git author identity for commits so GitHub attributes contributions correctly.
hatch3r-git-conventions
Conventional Commits type list, subject line rules, breaking-change footer format, branch naming template for type/short-description, and change-size discipline (PR-size ceiling with stacked-change escape hatch).
exam-answer-format
Guidelines for writing exam-style answers in a practical, conversational style with definitions first followed by real-world examples.
lecture-reference-linking
Guidelines for including course materials lists and inline references when writing exam answers or documentation that references course materials.
mermaid-diagrams
Guidelines for adding Mermaid diagrams to exam answers and documentation with automatic SVG generation support.