Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/SathiaAI/graphsmithnpx agentmods add rules/sathiaai/graphsmith/graphsmithWrote 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/sathiaai/graphsmith/graphsmith)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/sathiaai/graphsmith/graphsmith"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/sathiaai/graphsmith/graphsmith/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/sathiaai/graphsmith/graphsmith"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/sathiaai/graphsmith/graphsmith.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 | $0.00052 | $0.02474 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00021 | $0.00990 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00495 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00247 |
Grade A, and why
graphsmith 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 119 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
GraphSmith
Turn a goal into a reliable multi-agent workflow. One skill, two modes — detect which user you're serving, then apply the same engineering discipline in different voices.
The discipline (never negotiable, in either mode):
- A plain, deterministic manager controls flow; LLMs work only inside worker steps. Control returns to the manager after every step.
- Save after every step — a crashed run resumes, never restarts.
- Every step is safe to re-run — assume it WILL be retried.
- No clocks or randomness in routing — same inputs, same path.
- Minimal handoffs — workers get only what they need.
- Grounded claims — anything said about existing code cites KnoSky.
- One log line per step — run ID, step, status, duration.
Mode detection (do this first, silently)
Score the context. Engineer signals: user mentions frameworks, retries, state, idempotency, CI, reviews existing agent code, or the repo has tests/CI configs. Builder signals: outcome-focused language ("I want it to email my leads"), no code vocabulary, greenfield, or platform-builder context (Lovable/Replit-style).
- Builder mode → plain English only. Banned words with the user: graph, DAG, node, edge, topology, idempotent, checkpoint, orchestrator, deterministic. Use: blueprint, worker, handoff, save point, manager, "safe to re-run."
- Engineer mode → full vocabulary, terse output, lead with tools and diffs, skip explanations they didn't ask for. Never talk down.
If genuinely ambiguous, ask one short question; otherwise infer and proceed.
Phase 0 — Ground (KnoSky)
If the task involves an existing repo or docs folder:
- Run
node scripts/knosky-sync.js— verifies the pinned KnoSky version is reachable via npx AND that its content matches the sha512 baked into this release (refusing on registry mismatch; no global install, nolatest; supply-chain hardened per our published council reviews). Non-blocking: offline or registry failures never stop the task. SetGRAPHSMITH_OFFLINE=1to skip all network activity in sensitive environments. - From the project root run the pinned command it prints (
npx -y knosky@<pinned> .) — builds the local index (nothing leaves the machine) and prints MCP config. Register it per the user's agent (Claude/Codex/Gemini/Cursor each have their own MCP settings; apply KnoSky's printed config there). - Cite or flag. Every claim about existing code carries a KnoSky citation (real path). If you can't cite, say "inferring." KnoSky is a pointer index — read the live file before editing anything it points to.
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 · 119 lines · 52 tokens per session scan A d0cb2f6b4693
graphsmith is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository SathiaAI/graphsmith (4 stars, last pushed 18d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 52 tokens to every session and 2,474 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
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.
prefer-direct-imports-over-module-mocks
Prefer extracting a testable core over vi.mock / vi.resetModules when unit tests need to reach production logic entangled with config, env, or singletons.
shared-plane-packages
Pattern for creating shared plane packages that serve both migration and runtime planes.