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/mhmdreza-rafiei/agent-toolsWrote 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/mhmdreza-rafiei/agent-tools/git-workflow)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/mhmdreza-rafiei/agent-tools/git-workflow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/mhmdreza-rafiei/agent-tools/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/mhmdreza-rafiei/agent-tools/git-workflow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/mhmdreza-rafiei/agent-tools/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 | $0.00929 | $0.00929 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00372 | $0.00372 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00186 | $0.00186 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00093 | $0.00093 |
Grade A, and why
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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 92 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Git workflow (all projects)
When this rule applies
Follow this rule for project work (code, files, scaffolding, installs, git operations).
Skip for general chat, casual talk, image generation, and help-only sessions (questions, how-to, Cursor/docs) with no project changes.
Git must exist first
- If the directory is not a git repo (
git rev-parse --is-inside-work-treefails), stop substantive project work and ask the user to initialize or clone git first (git init, remote, etc.). - When creating a new project, offer
git init(and remote if they want) before meaningful changes; confirm setup before continuing.
User preference: commit vs push
Early in project work (or when unknown), ask what they want when work is done:
- Commit only — local checkpoint; never push unless they later ask.
- Push only — only if commits already exist and they explicitly want remote updated (still confirm).
- Both — commit then push when they approve at end of task.
- Neither — no git writes without a later explicit request.
Respect the latest answer for the session; re-ask if scope changes (e.g. they switch to “commit only” for a restore point).
Conventional Commits (required for new commits)
Format (spec):
<type>[optional scope][optional !]: <description>
[optional body]
[optional footer(s)]
- Types:
feat,fix, plusbuild,chore,ci,docs,style,refactor,perf,test,revert, etc. feat= new feature;fix= bug fix. Breaking:!before:and/orBREAKING CHANGE: <description>footer.- Title: lowercase type, imperative short description after colon and space.
- Body: blank line after title; explain why when helpful.
feat(api): add pagination to list endpoint
fix: prevent race when canceling in-flight requests
docs: correct CHANGELOG spelling
Do not commit files that likely contain secrets (.env, credentials). Warn if asked.
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 · 92 lines · 929 tokens per session scan A 2a8c2c185381
git-workflow is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository mhmdreza-rafiei/agent-tools (5 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 929 tokens to every session, about $0.0037 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 2026-08-31.
Other cursor rules, from other repositories
git
Git workflow — commit format, push policy, and PR process.
commit-sponsors
Every git commit message must acknowledge BetterDesk supporters.
no-ai-contributors
Never add AI tools as git authors or project contributors.
git-discipline
Commit, push, and branching rules. Owns ALL git behavior; other files state only their deviations.
git-commit-standards
Enforce structured Git commit messages.
conventional-commits
Use the Conventional Commit Messages specification to generate commit messages.