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/prisma/prisma-nextWrote 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/prisma/prisma-next/test-intent-readability)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/prisma/prisma-next/test-intent-readability"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/prisma/prisma-next/test-intent-readability/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/prisma/prisma-next/test-intent-readability"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/prisma/prisma-next/test-intent-readability.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 | $0.00000 | $0.00425 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00170 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00085 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00042 |
Grade A, and why
test-intent-readability 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to test-intent-readability — 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.
What it actually says
Test intent readability (context-driven structure)
Tests must communicate intent without requiring the reader to inspect implementation details.
Do
- Group assertions by the conditions under which they’re true.
- Use nested
describe()blocks to model state and transitions (“given…”, “when…”, “after…”).
- Use nested
- Make each
it()read as a statement about behavior under that context. - Prefer lifecycle tests that read like a story:
- given an object in state A
- when an action happens
- then behavior X is observed
- If a suite is validating a lifecycle, encode the lifecycle in the test structure (describes), not by scattered
it()blocks.
Don’t
- Don’t write “disjointed” tests where the reader must reverse‑engineer a lifecycle from unrelated expectations.
- Don’t mix multiple preconditions in a single
describe()without naming them. - Don’t rely on comments to explain context; make the context explicit via structure and naming.
Example: lifecycle tests
✅ Prefer:
describe('postgres driver', () => {
describe('given an unbound driver', () => {
it('throws when query is called', async () => { /* ... */ });
describe('when connected with url binding', () => {
it('executes queries', async () => { /* ... */ });
});
});
});
❌ Avoid:
describe('postgres driver', () => {
it('throws clear error when query called before connect', async () => { /* ... */ });
it('connects from url binding and executes', async () => { /* ... */ });
it('close works after connect with pool binding', async () => { /* ... */ });
});
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 · 53 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 53b823567fec
test-intent-readability is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository prisma/prisma-next (411 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 425 tokens. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to test-intent-readability, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other cursor rules, from other repositories
fuzzing
Fuzzing setup and guidelines for skia-rs.
testing
Testing conventions for Ion Design System using Jest and Angular Testing Library.
STAGE_S5_TEST_POINTS
A staged workflow for turning approved requirements into a complete list of test points. It checks required earlier documents and records any requirement that has no matching test point.
pre-flight-check
Mandatory fail-fast quality gate — run Typecheck, Lint, Test, and Security Audit sequentially before declaring any task done or committing code.
test
Rules for test files.
ponytail
Ponytail, lazy senior dev mode. Always pick the simplest solution that works.