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/timurgaleev/vibestackWrote 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/timurgaleev/vibestack/git)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/timurgaleev/vibestack/git"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/timurgaleev/vibestack/git/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/timurgaleev/vibestack/git"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/timurgaleev/vibestack/git.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 | $0.00505 | $0.00505 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00253 | $0.00253 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00101 | $0.00101 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00051 | $0.00051 |
Grade A, and why
git 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.
What it actually says
Git Workflow
CRITICAL: Commit & Push Policy
NEVER commit or push without explicit user permission.
- Only run
git commitwhen explicitly requested by the user - Only run
git pushwhen explicitly requested by the user - Do not auto-commit after code changes
- Only proceed when there is a clear instruction such as "commit"
Never, unless the user explicitly asks
- Committing secrets (
.env, API keys, tokens), binaries, or generated files - Bypassing hooks or signing (
--no-verify,--no-gpg-sign,--no-signoff) - Reverting unrelated changes in the working tree
Destructive & Irreversible Operations
Run these only when the user clearly asks. State the blast radius first and wait for confirmation:
git reset --hard,git checkout -- <path>,git restore --git push --force,git push --force-with-lease- Branch deletion (
git branch -D, deleting a remote branch) - Amending or rebasing published commits
git clean -f
Commit Message Format
<type>: <description>
<optional body>
Types: feat, fix, refactor, docs, test, chore, perf, ci
Pull Request Workflow
When creating PRs:
- Analyze full commit history (not just latest commit)
- Use
git diff [base-branch]...HEADto see all changes - Draft comprehensive PR summary
- Include test plan with TODOs
- Push with
-uflag if new branch
Feature Implementation Workflow
-
Plan First
- Use task-planner subagent to create implementation plan
- Identify dependencies and risks
- Break down into phases
-
Implementation
- Write tests for new functionality
- Implement functionality
- Run tests to verify correctness
- Verify 80%+ test coverage
-
Code Review
- Use quality-guard subagent for quality and security review
- Address CRITICAL and HIGH issues
- Fix MEDIUM issues when possible
-
Commit & Push
- Detailed commit messages
- Follow conventional commits format
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 · 505 tokens per session scan A bddcc850c904
git is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository timurgaleev/vibestack (6 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 505 tokens to every session, about $0.0025 per session on Opus 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 2026-09-19.
Other cursor rules, from other repositories
commit-message-generation-rule
Rules for writing consistent Git commit messages, using labels such as feat for a feature, fix for a bug, and docs for documentation. A commit message records one set of code changes.
windsurfrules
Pare wraps CLI tools in MCP servers returning structured JSON. Always prefer Pare MCP tools over raw CLI.
git
Git workflow and commit conventions.
git-commit
Use this when the user asks for a git commit, commit message, or commit command.
no-tool-contributors
Never add AI coding tools as contributors or co-authors.
04-review-and-commit
Review, completion, and commit workflow.