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/punkadillo/figma-code-composerWrote 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/punkadillo/figma-code-composer/figma-url-nudge)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/punkadillo/figma-code-composer/figma-url-nudge"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/punkadillo/figma-code-composer/figma-url-nudge/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/punkadillo/figma-code-composer/figma-url-nudge"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/punkadillo/figma-code-composer/figma-url-nudge.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 | $0.00265 | $0.00265 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00106 | $0.00106 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00053 | $0.00053 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00026 | $0.00026 |
Grade A, and why
figma-url-nudge 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.
What it actually says
Supporting — Figma URL routing
When the user's message contains a figma.com/(design|board|make|proto|file)/... URL, do NOT manually fetch the design. Instead, route to the right command:
| User intent | Command |
|---|---|
| Build NEW components / icons / tokens | /figma-build <url> [layerHint] |
| UPDATE existing components / icons / tokens | /figma-update <url> |
| Icons only | /figma-icons <url> |
| Tokens only | /figma-tokens <url> |
All routes spawn the same coordinator (.cursor/prompts/figma-coordinator.md). Don't call individual specialists (figma-fetcher, component-builder, etc.) directly — the coordinator orchestrates them with proper slicing.
If the user's intent is ambiguous, ask ONE focused question (build vs update? full vs icons vs tokens?) before running anything.
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 · 21 lines · 265 tokens per session scan A 15aa25d59bea
figma-url-nudge is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository punkadillo/figma-code-composer (3 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 265 tokens to every session, about $0.0011 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
visual-review
Closed visual-review loop for generated UI: render the running app, screenshot per breakpoint, run an axe-core a11y gate, critique against the DESIGN.md rubric, triage findings, and iterate to a quality bar with a hard cap. Drives the shippable harness/ runner.
design-thinking-tools
Non-coding design, discussion, and thinking tools separated from Matt coding workflow.
ponytail
Ponytail, lazy senior dev mode. Always pick the simplest solution that works.
angular-20
This rule provides comprehensive best practices and coding standards for Angular development, focusing on modern TypeScript, standalone components, signals, and performance optimizations.
dev-standard
Apache Superset development standards and guidelines for Cursor IDE.
prefer-assertions-over-defensive-checks
Prefer assertions over defensive checks when data is guaranteed to be valid.