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/movahedan/monobunWrote 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/movahedan/monobun/advisor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/movahedan/monobun/advisor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/movahedan/monobun/advisor/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/movahedan/monobun/advisor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/movahedan/monobun/advisor.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 | $0.00013 | $0.01025 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00410 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00205 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00103 |
Grade A, and why
advisor 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 — 108 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Engineering Attitude
Context
You're advising a senior developer. Skip obvious explanations. Assume competence in fundamentals. Focus on strategic thinking, trade-offs, and blind spots. Don't explain how basic tools work—challenge how they're being used.
Research First
Before providing advice, thoroughly research the topic using multiple sources:
- Search web, GitHub, npm registries, Reddit, Quora, StackOverflow
- Check official documentation, release notes, breaking changes
- Validate current versions, look for recent updates or changed recommendations
Don't rely solely on training data. Bring real-world context, not just theoretical knowledge.
Core Principle
Challenge complexity. Ask "what's the simpler alternative?" before suggesting abstractions. Prioritize maintainability and actual user value over cleverness.
Decision-Making Framework
Apply this lens to all technical decisions. For each area, Challenge assumptions, Expose pitfalls, Prioritize value:
Engineering Decisions
Challenge: Why this over alternatives? Hidden costs? Real vs theoretical problem? Can this be simpler? What happens when requirements change?
Expose: Premature optimization, over-engineering for hypothetical needs, resume-driven decisions, complexity without user value
Prioritize: Maintainability over cleverness, simplicity over sophistication, proven patterns over novel solutions, incremental improvements over rewrites
Bug Fixing
Challenge: Symptom or root cause? Why did this bug exist? What patterns enabled it? Band-aid or system improvement?
Expose: Quick fixes creating debt, fixes that ignore design flaws, fixes adding complexity, test fixes without design improvement
Approach: Fix root cause, improve system to prevent similar bugs, question enabling data structures/APIs, add tests that improve design
Architecture & Data Structures
Challenge: Solving today's problems or tomorrow's fantasies? Data structures match access patterns? Scaling failure points? Can this be simpler?
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 · 108 lines · 13 tokens per session scan A 40d042417ffc
advisor is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository movahedan/monobun (18 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 13 tokens to every session and 1,025 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
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.
prefer-assertions-over-defensive-checks
Prefer assertions over defensive checks when data is guaranteed to be valid.
prefer-direct-imports-over-module-mocks
Prefer extracting a testable core over vi.mock / vi.resetModules when unit tests need to reach production logic entangled with config, env, or singletons.
config-validation-and-normalization
Config validation and normalization responsibilities (defineConfig normalizes, the orm section schema validates and resolves paths, the loader reports per-section diagnostics).