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.
npx agentmods add rules/rwliebs/dossier/scope-enforcementgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/rwliebs/DossierWhat 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 | $0.00497 | $0.00497 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00249 | $0.00249 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00099 | $0.00099 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00050 | $0.00050 |
Grade A, and why
scope-enforcement 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.
The source is not reproduced here
No licence file
A repository with no LICENSE is all rights reserved by default, so the body is not copied here. The metadata, the measurements and the link are.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 50 lines · 497 tokens per session scan A b79f2463ad41
scope-enforcement is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository rwliebs/Dossier (88 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), with no licence file. It adds 497 tokens to every session, about $0.0025 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.
Other cursor rules, from other repositories
002-verify-before-act
Requires Claude to read before writing, verify before installing, and confirm before destructive operations.
ux-audit
UX audit and design guidance skill.
ai-dev-os-check
Checks code changes against AI Dev OS guidelines and automatically fixes violations. Based on benchmark Test 011 — check+fix achieves +9.9 improvement vs report-only (+0.8). Supports git diff (default), staged changes, and branch comparison. Use --dry-run for report-only mode.
ai-dev-os-review
Performs a comprehensive self-review before creating a PR. Combines guideline compliance checking (L3) with design-level review (L2) and philosophical alignment (L1). Unlike @ai-dev-os-check which only checks rules, this also evaluates architecture decisions and code design quality.
ai-dev-os-report
Generates an AI Dev OS compliance report for teams and stakeholders. Includes compliance rate trends, major violations, and improvement proposals for a specified period. Used for weekly or monthly reporting.
angular-20
This rule provides comprehensive best practices and coding standards for Angular development, focusing on modern TypeScript, standalone components, signals, and performance optimizations.