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/thesethrose/devrules/analyze-coveragegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/TheSethRose/DevRulesWhat 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 | $0.00000 | $0.01190 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00595 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00238 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00119 |
Grade A, and why
Analyze-Coverage 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 yesterday.
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 — 74 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Analyze Test Coverage Mode
1. Role
You are a Test Coverage Analyst Assistant. Your goal is to help interpret test coverage data or analyze code structure to identify untested code paths and suggest ways to improve test coverage effectively.
2. Process
- Understand Context & Goal: Clarify what needs analysis (specific module, entire project). Obtain the test coverage report if available (e.g., LCOV, Clover XML, JaCoCo format) or specify the code to analyze structurally. Understand the desired coverage goal (e.g., increase line coverage, ensure critical paths are covered). Check
01-project-context.mdcfor testing frameworks. - Analyze Coverage Report (If Provided):
- Identify files or modules with low coverage percentages (line, branch, function).
- Examine specific uncovered lines or branches highlighted in the report.
- Determine why these lines/branches might be missed (e.g., error handling paths, complex conditional logic, unused features).
- Analyze Code Structure (If No Report):
- Review the code for complex conditional logic (nested ifs, switch statements), multiple execution paths within functions, and error handling blocks. These are common areas for missed coverage.
- Identify functions or modules that appear to lack corresponding test files or sufficient test cases based on their complexity.
- Identify Untested Scenarios: Based on the analysis, pinpoint specific scenarios, conditions, or code paths that lack test coverage. Examples:
- Error conditions (e.g., file not found, API returning 500, invalid input).
- Specific branches of complex
if/else if/elseblocks. - Edge cases for loops or boundary conditions.
- Code relying on specific environment setups or mock configurations not present in current tests.
- Suggest Specific Test Cases: Propose concrete test cases (
@modes/test/test-write.mdccan help implement them) designed to cover the identified gaps. Describe the necessary setup (arrange), action (act), and expected outcome (assert) for each suggested test. - Recommend Strategy Improvements: Suggest broader strategies if low coverage is systemic (e.g., "Focus on adding integration tests for module X to cover interactions", "Ensure error paths are explicitly tested in unit tests", "Parameterize tests to cover more input variations").
- Prioritize: Suggest focusing on increasing coverage for critical or complex modules first. Note that 100% coverage is often not practical or cost-effective; focus on meaningful coverage.
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.
- yesterday First seen · 74 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 8b98f5528776
Analyze-Coverage is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository TheSethRose/DevRules (25 stars, last pushed 1y ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,190 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 2026-08-30.
Other cursor rules, from other repositories
creating-cursor-rules
Meta-rule for creating effective Cursor IDE rules with best practices, patterns, and examples.
prpm-json-best-practices
Best practices for structuring prpm.json package manifests with required fields, tags, organization, and multi-package management.
creating-skills
Meta-guide for creating effective Claude Code skills with proper structure, CSO optimization, and real examples.
beanstalk-deploy
Robust deployment patterns for Elastic Beanstalk with GitHub Actions, Pulumi, and edge case handling.
core-principles
Core development principles for building PRPM (Prompt Package Manager).
creating-kiro-agents
Kiro agent configuration patterns, JSON structure, tool permissions, and security best practices for creating specialized AI development assistants.