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/stainless-code/codemapWrote 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/stainless-code/codemap/pr-comment-fact-check)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/stainless-code/codemap/pr-comment-fact-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/stainless-code/codemap/pr-comment-fact-check/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/stainless-code/codemap/pr-comment-fact-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/stainless-code/codemap/pr-comment-fact-check.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 | $0.00011 | $0.00011 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00004 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00002 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00001 |
Grade A, and why
pr-comment-fact-check 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
../../.agents/rules/pr-comment-fact-check.md
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 · 1 lines · 11 tokens per session scan A 0165d720b22c
pr-comment-fact-check is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository stainless-code/codemap (8 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 11 tokens to every session, about $0.0000 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
cursor-rule
This project can use agentmap (@raymondchins/agentmap) — a queryable import/symbol map at .claude/agentmap/.
techdebt
Find and eliminate technical debt across the whole codebase — duplicated code, dead code, redundant abstractions.
marie-kondo
Marie Kondo - organized minimalism, eliminates code that doesn't spark joy.
review-pr-against-issue
Workflow for reviewing a PR against the GitHub issue it claims to fix, including fetching PRs when gh CLI can't reach github.com.
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.
check
Analyze staged git changes with archguardian before committing.