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/pallerana/agentic-loop-engineering-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/pallerana/agentic-loop-engineering-kit/service-quality-drill)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/pallerana/agentic-loop-engineering-kit/service-quality-drill"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/pallerana/agentic-loop-engineering-kit/service-quality-drill/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/pallerana/agentic-loop-engineering-kit/service-quality-drill"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/pallerana/agentic-loop-engineering-kit/service-quality-drill.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 | $0.00689 | $0.00689 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00276 | $0.00276 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00138 | $0.00138 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00069 | $0.00069 |
Grade A, and why
service-quality-drill 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 — 47 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Service Quality Drill
Applies to Java/Gradle services in consumer monorepos using the Agentic Loop Engineering Kit.
Also follow java-springboot-standards.mdc for coding patterns, layering, and ArchUnit rules.
Quality drill — every change
- Implement — smallest correct fix; match repo conventions; no speculative refactors.
- Regression test — unit for branches; integration/WebMvcTest/WireMock for wiring and HTTP contracts. Every Copilot/CodeQL thread must cite a named test.
- Local build:
./gradlew clean buildfrom the repo root (full suite — not-x test). - JaCoCo gate — read
build.gradle.ktsin the repo you are changing:- Default line ratio ≥ 0.80 unless
build.gradle.ktsstates otherwise — never assume; do not inflate exclusions to pass the gate. - High-coverage services (e.g. MVP repos): ≥ 1.00 on measured packages when profile
jacoco_line_ratiorequires it. - On failure: inspect
build/reports/jacoco/jacocoTestReport.htmland add tests for uncovered measured lines.
- Default line ratio ≥ 0.80 unless
- ce-code-review vs
main— fix all P0/P1 before commit. For PR reviews, follow pr-code-review.mdc. - Commit only when the user asks; batch logically.
- Push once per batch (minimize CI workflow runs).
- CI green:
gh pr checks <n> --repo <org>/<repo-name>— wait for:lint,build-and-test,Trivy,dependency-review,gitleaks,CodeQL
- Review threads: fix in code + test → reply → resolve. No “follow-up only” replies without implementation.
- Wiki writeback (when LLM-wiki is installed): append
docs/wiki/log.md, updatedocs/wiki/current-status.mdfor durable outcomes.
Required merge checks (common across repos)
Branch protection on main expects the CI checks above plus code-owner reviews, conversation resolution, and linear history. CodeQL uses GitHub default setup — do not add a duplicate CodeQL workflow file.
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 · 47 lines · 689 tokens per session scan A faa7940c6983
service-quality-drill is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository pallerana/agentic-loop-engineering-kit (4 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 689 tokens to every session, about $0.0028 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
vios-testing-cicd
Testing and CI/CD conventions for VIOS.
workflow
BDD-style workflow, UI screenshots in the PR, HTTP OpenAPI, config schema and CLI packaging sync before lint, final checks, the comment on an issue a merge closes and the cleanup after the merge.
build-tags
The shipped build tag set is spelled in several places that move together.
do-no-shortcuts
Stop before every shortcut — do the proper path instead.
add-linter
Add linter configs and GitHub Actions workflows for languages detected in the current repo. Use when the user wants to add linters, set up code quality checks, or after sync-scaffold suggests running /add-linter.
testing-ci-rule
testing-ci-rule from DaunteEth/woofi-pro-mcp.