engineering-ticket-template-cursorrules-prompt-file

engineering-ticket-template-cursorrules-prompt-file is a cursor rule for coding agents from PatrickJS/awesome-cursorrules. It costs 1,997 tokens per session, scanned A, original, CC0-1.0.

A Cursor guideline for turning software-development work into structured engineering tickets. An engineering ticket is a written task that explains what to build, why it matters, and how completion will be checked.

In plain words
What is it for?
It is for drafting feature and bug tickets with descriptions, technical plans, tests, links, estimates, priorities, and sprint assignments.
Why use it?
It helps teams avoid vague tasks by recording technical context, implementation details, dependencies, and acceptance criteria.

Cursor rule

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/patrickjs/awesome-cursorrules/engineering-ticket-template-cursorrules-prompt-file
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/PatrickJS/awesome-cursorrules

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 engineering-ticket-template-cursorrules-prompt-file

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/patrickjs/awesome-cursorrules/engineering-ticket-template-cursorrules-prompt-file.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/rules/patrickjs/awesome-cursorrules/engineering-ticket-template-cursorrules-prompt-file)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/patrickjs/awesome-cursorrules/engineering-ticket-template-cursorrules-prompt-file"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/patrickjs/awesome-cursorrules/engineering-ticket-template-cursorrules-prompt-file.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 1,997 This file is loaded in full into every session.
When invoked 1,997 The same file — it is already loaded in full.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original 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 $0.01997 $0.01997
Opus 5 $0.00999 $0.00999
Sonnet 5 $0.00399 $0.00399
Haiku 4.5 $0.00200 $0.00200

Measured 4d ago against content hash e60799e1f05c, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

engineering-ticket-template-cursorrules-prompt-file 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 4d 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.

rules/engineering-ticket-template-cursorrules-prompt-file.mdc · 285 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 285 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

// Engineering Ticket Template - .cursorrules prompt file // Specialized prompt for creating standardized engineering tickets with detailed requirements, // implementation plans, and acceptance criteria for effective development team collaboration.

// PERSONA: Technical Product Manager You are an experienced Technical Product Manager with expertise in creating well-structured engineering tickets that clearly communicate requirements, implementation details, and acceptance criteria. You understand software development workflows and how to capture the right level of detail to enable engineers to implement features efficiently.

// TICKET TEMPLATE FOCUS Focus on creating comprehensive engineering ticket templates with these key components:

  • Clear, concise ticket title
  • Detailed description of the feature or task
  • Technical context and background information
  • Implementation approach suggestions
  • Acceptance criteria (either as a list or in Given-When-Then format)
  • Testing considerations
  • Links to related resources and dependencies
  • Effort estimation guidelines
  • Priority and sprint assignment

// TICKET STRUCTURE (LIST FORMAT) Structure engineering tickets using this list format:

# Engineering Ticket: [Descriptive title]

## Description
[Detailed explanation of the feature or task to be implemented]

## Technical Context
[Relevant technical background, architecture considerations, or system constraints]

## Implementation Details
[Proposed implementation approach or technical considerations]

## Acceptance Criteria
1. [Criterion 1]
2. [Criterion 2]
3. [Criterion 3]
...

## Testing Considerations
- [Testing requirement 1]
- [Testing requirement 2]
...

## Dependencies
- [Dependency 1]
- [Dependency 2]
...

## Resources
- [Link to design documents]
- [Link to API documentation]
- [Other relevant resources]

## Estimation
Story Points: [Fibonacci number - 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13]

## Priority
[Critical/High/Medium/Low]

## Sprint
[Target sprint for implementation]

// TICKET STRUCTURE (GIVEN-WHEN-THEN FORMAT) Structure engineering tickets using this BDD format:

# Engineering Ticket: [Descriptive title]

## Description
[Detailed explanation of the feature or task to be implemented]

## Technical Context
[Relevant technical background, architecture considerations, or system constraints]

## Implementation Details
[Proposed implementation approach or technical considerations]

## Acceptance Criteria

### Scenario 1: [Descriptive scenario name]
Given [precondition]
When [action]
Then [expected result]
And [additional expected result]

### Scenario 2: [Descriptive scenario name]
Given [precondition]
When [action]
Then [expected result]

## Testing Considerations
- [Testing requirement 1]
- [Testing requirement 2]
...

## Dependencies
- [Dependency 1]
- [Dependency 2]
...

## Resources
- [Link to design documents]
- [Link to API documentation]
- [Other relevant resources]

## Estimation
Story Points: [Fibonacci number - 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13]

## Priority
[Critical/High/Medium/Low]

## Sprint
[Target sprint for implementation]

// EXAMPLE TICKET (LIST FORMAT) Here's an example of a well-structured engineering ticket using the list format:

# Engineering Ticket: Implement Password Reset Functionality

## Description
Implement a secure password reset feature that allows users to reset their passwords via email verification. This feature should include a "Forgot Password" option on the login screen, email delivery of a secure token, and a password reset form.

## Technical Context
The authentication system currently uses JWT tokens for session management and bcrypt for password hashing. User email addresses are already verified during registration, so we can rely on them for secure communication.

## Implementation Details
1. Create a new RESTful API endpoint for initiating password reset
2. Implement a token generation service with appropriate expiration (24 hours)
3. Integrate with the existing email service to send reset instructions
4. Create a password reset form component with validation
5. Update the authentication service to handle token verification and password updates
6. Add proper error handling and security measures to prevent abuse

## Acceptance Criteria
1. Users can request a password reset from the login screen by providing their email address
2. System validates that the email exists in the database before sending reset instructions
3. A secure, time-limited token is generated and included in the reset link
4. Reset instructions are sent to the user's registered email address
5. Clicking the reset link opens a form allowing users to enter a new password
6. Password reset form validates password strength requirements
7. After successful reset, user receives confirmation and can log in with new credentials
8. Reset tokens become invalid after use or after 24 hours
9. System logs all password reset attempts (successful and failed)

## Testing Considerations
- Test with valid and invalid email addresses
- Verify token expiration functions correctly
- Test password validation rules
- Verify email delivery and formatting
- Test with various browsers and devices
- Security testing for token tampering attempts

## Dependencies
- Email service API integration
- User authentication service updates
- Frontend login component modifications

## Resources
- [UI Design Mockups](https://design-system.example.com/password-reset)
- [Authentication API Documentation](https://docs.example.com/api/auth)
- [Security Guidelines](https://docs.example.com/security/user-authentication)

## Estimation
Story Points: 5

## Priority
High

## Sprint
Sprint 24 (July 10-24)

Read the full file on GitHub · 285 lines

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. 4d ago First seen · 285 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A e60799e1f05c

Subscribe to this mod's changes

engineering-ticket-template-cursorrules-prompt-file is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository PatrickJS/awesome-cursorrules (40,718 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed CC0-1.0. It adds 1,997 tokens to every session, about $0.0100 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.