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/savagelysubtle/big-brain-memory-bank/section-checkpoint-systemgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/savagelysubtle/BIG-BRAIN-Memory-BankWrote 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/savagelysubtle/big-brain-memory-bank/section-checkpoint-system)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/savagelysubtle/big-brain-memory-bank/section-checkpoint-system"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/savagelysubtle/big-brain-memory-bank/section-checkpoint-system.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.01770 | $0.01770 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00885 | $0.00885 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00354 | $0.00354 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00177 | $0.00177 |
Grade A, and why
section-checkpoint-system 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 4d 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 section-checkpoint-system — 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 218 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
ENHANCED SECTION CHECKPOINT SYSTEM
TL;DR: This system adds clear, prominent checkpoint markers at the end of each workflow section with YES/NO questions to verify completion before moving on. The system uses tasks.md as the single source of truth for task status tracking.
🚨 SECTION TRANSITION MARKERS
Use these visual markers to clearly indicate section transitions:
======== INITIALIZATION COMPLETE ⟹ STARTING DOCUMENTATION SETUP ========
======== DOCUMENTATION SETUP COMPLETE ⟹ STARTING TASK PLANNING ========
======== TASK PLANNING COMPLETE ⟹ STARTING IMPLEMENTATION ========
======== IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETE ⟹ STARTING REFLECTION ========
======== REFLECTION COMPLETE ⟹ STARTING ARCHIVING ========
======== ARCHIVING COMPLETE ⟹ TASK FINISHED ========
✓ ENHANCED CHECKPOINT TEMPLATE
✓ SECTION CHECKPOINT: [SECTION NAME]
- Requirement 1? [YES/NO]
- Requirement 2? [YES/NO]
- Requirement 3? [YES/NO]
- Section tracking updated to [X]? [YES/NO]
→ If all YES: Ready for next section
→ If any NO: Fix missing items before proceeding
✓ INITIALIZATION CHECKPOINT
✓ SECTION CHECKPOINT: INITIALIZATION
- ALL Memory Bank files reviewed? [YES/NO]
- Task objective clearly stated? [YES/NO]
- Platform identified and documented? [YES/NO]
- .cursorrules file (not directory) created/updated? [YES/NO]
- tasks.md verified to exist? [YES/NO]
- Reference check completed? [YES/NO]
- Section tracking updated to [X]? [YES/NO]
→ If all YES: Ready for DOCUMENTATION SETUP
→ If any NO: Fix missing items before proceeding
✓ DOCUMENTATION SETUP CHECKPOINT
✓ SECTION CHECKPOINT: DOCUMENTATION SETUP
- systemPatterns.md updated? [YES/NO]
- techContext.md updated with platform information? [YES/NO]
- activeContext.md updated? [YES/NO]
- progress.md updated? [YES/NO]
- tasks.md created/updated with initial task? [YES/NO]
- .cursorrules updated with project patterns? [YES/NO]
- Section tracking updated to [X]? [YES/NO]
→ If all YES: Ready for TASK PLANNING
→ If any NO: Fix missing items before proceeding
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 218 lines · 1,770 tokens per session scan A 47d12d45f6d0
section-checkpoint-system is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository savagelysubtle/BIG-BRAIN-Memory-Bank (5 stars, last pushed 1y ago), licensed MIT. It adds 1,770 tokens to every session, about $0.0089 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to section-checkpoint-system, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other cursor rules, from other repositories
composer-coding-excellence
Coding craft — surgical edits, convention matching, no scope creep, no slop comments, no fabricated APIs.
composer-core
Always-on builder spine — continue the app, demoable slice, Build loop, Run/Wired handoff, ask only on high confusion weight.
clarify-first
Infer-and-act by default — ask only on high confusion weight, after inspecting, with a decision-linked question.
composer-reasoning
High-stakes judgment for architectural or multi-option work — tradeoffs, one-way doors, reason-then-re-evaluate, honest pushback.
composer-debugging
Root-cause debugging — reproduce, trace data flow, test cheapest hypothesis, fix the cause not the symptom.
composer-deep-research
Edge-case research for audits, vendor comparisons, and unfamiliar APIs — primaries first, iterative retrieval, explicit conflicts; not the default build path.