prefer-object-matcher

A test-writing rule that groups checks for several related values into one object comparison instead of using many separate equality checks.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it in unit tests that verify multiple properties, aliases, flags, or other related results at the same time.
Why use it?
A single comparison makes the expected state easier to read and maintain, especially when fields are added or removed. It also shows how the checked values relate to one another.

Cursor rule for Codex

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/prisma/prisma-next/prefer-object-matcher
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/prisma/prisma-next

Made for: Codex.

Per session 0 Nothing until a file matches its globs; then the whole rule loads.
When invoked 502 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin 100% copy Near-identical to another mod 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 $0.00000 $0.00502
Opus 5 $0.00000 $0.00251
Sonnet 5 $0.00000 $0.00100
Haiku 4.5 $0.00000 $0.00050

Measured 2d ago against content hash 040ab71fb297, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

prefer-object-matcher 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 2d 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.

Origin

This is a copy

100% identical to prefer-object-matcher — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.

.agents/rules/prefer-object-matcher.mdc · 71 lines

What it actually says

Prefer Object Matchers Over Multiple Individual Assertions

CRITICAL: When checking multiple related values in a test, use a single object matcher instead of multiple individual expect().toBe() calls.

The Problem

Multiple individual expect().toBe() calls for related values:

  • Create visual clutter
  • Make it harder to see the expected state at a glance
  • Are harder to maintain when adding or removing checks
  • Don't clearly show the relationship between values

The Solution

❌ WRONG: Multiple individual expect().toBe() calls

expect(alias1).toBe('user_id');
expect(alias2).toBe('user_email');
expect(tracker.has('user_id')).toBe(true);
expect(tracker.has('user_email')).toBe(true);

✅ CORRECT: Single object matcher

expect({
  alias1,
  alias2,
  has1: tracker.has('user_id'),
  has2: tracker.has('user_email'),
}).toMatchObject({
  alias1: 'user_id',
  alias2: 'user_email',
  has1: true,
  has2: true,
});

When to Use Object Matchers

Use object matchers when:

  • ✅ You have 2+ related expect().toBe() calls checking different values
  • ✅ The values are logically related (e.g., multiple aliases, multiple properties)
  • ✅ The checks are part of the same test assertion

Exception: Single expect().toBe() calls are fine when checking a single isolated value.

Benefits

  • Better readability: All expected values are visible in one place
  • Easier maintenance: Add or remove checks by modifying the object
  • Clearer intent: Shows the expected state as a cohesive unit
  • Less verbose: Reduces test code size

Examples from Codebase

Good patterns:

  • Single object matcher with toMatchObject
  • Combined related assertions into one object

Bad patterns (to avoid):

  • Multiple expect().toBe() calls for related values
  • Scattered assertions that could be combined
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. 2d ago First seen · 71 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 040ab71fb297

Subscribe to this mod's changes

prefer-object-matcher is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository prisma/prisma-next (420 stars, last pushed 8d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 502 tokens. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to prefer-object-matcher, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.