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/TashanGKD/cognitive-osWrote 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/tashangkd/cognitive-os/cognitive-principle-check)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/tashangkd/cognitive-os/cognitive-principle-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/tashangkd/cognitive-os/cognitive-principle-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/tashangkd/cognitive-os/cognitive-principle-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/tashangkd/cognitive-os/cognitive-principle-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 | $0.00057 | $0.00723 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00362 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00145 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00072 |
Grade A, and why
cognitive-principle-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 8d 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
92% identical to cognitive-principle-check — 2 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.
What it actually says
新知识原则校验规则（Principle Check on New Knowledge）
核心原则
L1.5 底层原则是认知体系的「操作系统」，所有L1文档的内容都应该与其相容。
每次向L1文档写入新内容时，AI 应该快速检查是否与已确认的L1.5原则有张力。
触发条件
当 AI 刚完成对 cognitive/L1_knowledge/ 下任何文件的 Write 操作后，自动执行检查。
检查流程
Step 1：读取 L1.5/底层原则库.md 中「已确认原则」部分（P1/P2 等）
Step 2：对刚写入的内容，快速判断：
- 是否与 P1（验证优先于感受） 有张力？ → 警惕：「感觉」「直觉上」「应该」等未经验证的表述被写成了规律
- 是否与 P2（从小点切入升维到底层规律） 有张力？ → 警惕：从单一场景直接推导出了宽泛的通用规律而未说明推导路径
Step 3：根据检查结果决定是否提示：
- 无张力 → 无需提示，静默通过，正常写入
- 有张力（轻微）：
⚠️ 注意：刚写入的内容可能与P[N]「[原则表述]」有轻微张力。 「[有张力的具体句子]」 建议：可以加一个前提条件，或在括号中说明适用场景。 [忽略，保持原文] [帮我加前提说明] - 有张力（明显）：
⚠️ 注意：刚写入的内容与P[N]「[原则表述]」存在明显张力。 「[有张力的具体句子]」 原则说：[P?的核心表述] 这段内容隐含：[隐含的相反前提] 建议处理方式：[具体建议] [忽略] [修改这段内容] [更新原则以包容这个例外]
说明
-
这个检查是辅助性的，不是阻断性的 用户说「忽略」就忽略，AI 不强制阻止写入
-
只检查「已确认原则」（✅ 状态），不检查候选原则（🟡 状态）
-
不要过度敏感：只有明确的逻辑张力才提示，不要为了「鸡蛋里挑骨头」而提示
-
如果用户说「更新原则以包容这个例外」：触发
cognitive-extract-principleSkill，看是否需要修订 P1/P2 的边界条件
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 65 lines · 57 tokens per session scan A 9def50aa605c
cognitive-principle-check is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository TashanGKD/cognitive-os (8 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 57 tokens to every session and 723 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 92% identical to cognitive-principle-check, differing in 2 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other cursor rules, from other repositories
cognitive-l3-auto-log
An automatic logging rule for important changes to a cognitive-structure system. It appends dated entries to a system log after related skills run or key documents and records are changed.
cognitive-principle-check
A consistency check for adding new material to L1 cognitive-structure documents. It compares the new text with confirmed L1.5 principles, which are the system’s underlying rules.
profile-collector
A Chinese-language assistant for building and maintaining a structured researcher's profile. The profile records identity, skills, current needs, thinking style, motivation, personality, and an overall interpretation.
fragment-before-direct-edit
A rule for recording a new idea as a smaller knowledge fragment before adding it to a main knowledge document. It distinguishes new insights from corrections, formatting changes, and other direct edits.
memory-bank
You are an expert software engineer with a unique characteristic: your memory resets completely between sessions. This isn't a limitation - it's what drives you to maintain perfect documentation. At the beginning of each dialogue, you rely ENTIRELY on your Memory Bank to understand the project and continue work…
memory
Persistent memory graph — load graphindex.md at session start, follow task routing table, update after significant changes.