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/tekdi/ai-skills-rulesWrote 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/tekdi/ai-skills-rules/react-8-testing-rules)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/tekdi/ai-skills-rules/react-8-testing-rules"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/tekdi/ai-skills-rules/react-8-testing-rules/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/tekdi/ai-skills-rules/react-8-testing-rules"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/tekdi/ai-skills-rules/react-8-testing-rules.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 | $0.00000 | $0.04436 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.01774 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00887 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00444 |
Grade A, and why
react-8-testing-rules 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.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 650 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A ca5b87139362
react-8-testing-rules is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository tekdi/ai-skills-rules (2 stars, last pushed 17d ago), with no licence file. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 4,436 tokens. 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
upgrade-tests
// ✅ CORRECT: Upgrade package pattern await using ctx = testReactResource(appRouter, { server: { // server configuration }, client(opts) { return { links: [ httpLink({ url: opts.httpUrl, // client configuration }), ], }; }, }).
react-query-tests
// ✅ CORRECT: Legacy React Query pattern const ctx = konn() .beforeEach(() => createAppRouter()) .afterEach((ctx) => ctx?.close?.()) .done().
tanstack-react-query-tests
// ✅ CORRECT: Use await using for automatic cleanup await using ctx = testReactResource(appRouter, { server: { // server configuration }, client(opts) { return { links: [ httpLink({ url: opts.httpUrl, // client configuration }), ], }; }, }).
verify
Review implementation ownership and verify Plate packages, editor states and registry artifacts through their actual proof owners. Use before writing a plan's phase exits or proof gates, before checking, skipping, deferring or moving any plan proof gate to limits, before writing or changing any test, including…
benchmark
Measure and repair Plate/Slate performance, or review a performance design before running its applicable benchmark lanes. Use before writing, reviewing, running, rerunning, checking, skipping or deferring a performance gate, including a plan's scale gate, before writing a benchmark script, before explaining a…
issue-harvester
Maintain exhaustive Slate/Plate issue-closure ledgers from current issue, PR, test and local proof evidence.