cursorrules

A project rule requiring interactive feedback before asking the user a clarification question and before finishing a task. Interactive feedback is a separate prompt or review step that lets the user respond during the workflow.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it in projects where the agent must request feedback with the project directory and a short summary before asking questions or reporting completion.
Why use it?
It ensures the user gets a chance to clarify unclear choices and review the result before the work is considered complete. This can prevent decisions from being made on missing assumptions.

Cursor rule for Cursor

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/phidn/cursor-feedback/cursorrules
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/phidn/cursor-feedback

Made for: Cursor.

Per session 553 This file is loaded in full into every session.
When invoked 553 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 $0.00553 $0.00553
Opus 5 $0.00277 $0.00277
Sonnet 5 $0.00111 $0.00111
Haiku 4.5 $0.00055 $0.00055

Measured yesterday against content hash ebef9285feae, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

cursorrules 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 yesterday.

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.

.cursorrules · 67 lines

What it actually says

Interactive Feedback Rule

  • Always Use Interactive Feedback for Questions:

    • Before asking the user any clarifying questions, call interactive-feedback-mcp.interactive_feedback
    • Provide the current project directory and a summary of what you need clarification on
    • Wait for the interactive feedback response before proceeding
  • Always Use Interactive Feedback Before Completion:

    • Before completing any user request, call interactive-feedback-mcp.interactive_feedback
    • Provide the current project directory and a summary of what was accomplished
    • If the feedback response is empty, you can complete the request without calling the MCP again
    • If feedback is provided, address it before completing the request
  • Required Parameters:

    • project_directory: Full absolute path to the project directory
    • summary: Short, one-line summary of the question or completed work
  • Examples:

    // ✅ DO: Call interactive feedback before asking questions
    // Before asking: "Which database should we use?"
    await interactive_feedback({
      project_directory: "/Users/oplacrm/workspace/working/work_frontend/frontend",
      summary: "Need clarification on database choice for the project"
    });
    
    // ✅ DO: Call interactive feedback before completing requests
    // After implementing a feature
    await interactive_feedback({
      project_directory: "/Users/oplacrm/workspace/working/work_frontend/frontend",
      summary: "Completed user authentication implementation with JWT"
    });
    
    // ❌ DON'T: Ask questions directly without interactive feedback
    // "What framework would you like to use?" - Missing interactive feedback call
    
    // ❌ DON'T: Complete requests without interactive feedback
    // "I've finished implementing the feature." - Missing interactive feedback call
    
  • Workflow Integration:

    • This rule applies to all interactions, regardless of the specific task or technology
    • Interactive feedback helps ensure user satisfaction and catches any missed requirements
    • The feedback mechanism allows for real-time course correction and validation
  • Exception Handling:

    • If the interactive feedback tool is unavailable, proceed with completion flow
    • Log when interactive feedback cannot be used for debugging purposes
    • Never loop the interactive feedback call if the response is empty on completion
  • Best Practices:

    • Keep summaries concise but descriptive
    • Always use the full absolute path for project_directory
    • Use interactive feedback as a quality gate, not a blocker
    • Respect empty feedback responses as approval to proceed
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. yesterday First seen · 67 lines · 553 tokens per session scan A ebef9285feae

Subscribe to this mod's changes

cursorrules is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository phidn/cursor-feedback (8 stars, last pushed 1y ago), licensed MIT. It adds 553 tokens to every session, about $0.0028 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 2026-08-31.