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/with-geun/alive-analysis/alive-decisionsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/with-geun/alive-analysisWrote 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/with-geun/alive-analysis/alive-decisions)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/with-geun/alive-analysis/alive-decisions"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/with-geun/alive-analysis/alive-decisions.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00039 | $0.00748 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00374 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00150 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00075 |
Grade A, and why
alive-decisions 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 5d 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 81 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
alive-analysis — Analysis Decision Records
This rule activates the Decision Records check system. It prevents AI from re-proposing methodology alternatives your team has already evaluated and rejected.
When this rule applies
Activate when:
- User runs
/analysis-dr(any subcommand) - User runs
/analysis-next(stage transition — DR check happens before agent dispatch) - A metric definition, statistical method, or segment scope is being decided in the current analysis
- User mentions "지표 정의", "통계 방법", "A/B 테스트 방법", "세그먼트 기준", "모델 선택"
Decision Records Check Protocol
Step 1: Check if DRs exist
Read analyses/decisions/INDEX.md.
If the file doesn't exist or has no entries: skip the rest of this protocol.
Step 2: Match DRs to current context
For each DR in the index, check relevance to the current analysis:
- Metric DRs: Does the analysis reference a metric defined in a DR?
- Methodology DRs: Is a statistical method being used or suggested?
- Scope DRs: Is a segment or time window being defined?
- Model DRs: Is an algorithm or model being selected?
- Principle DRs: Does the analysis involve causal claims or metric proposals?
Step 3: Apply matching DRs
For each matching DR:
- Read the full DR file (
analyses/decisions/DR-{NNN}.md) - Apply its 결정 (decision) as a constraint
- Do NOT suggest alternatives listed as rejected in the 근거 section
- If you believe the DR should be reconsidered, state this explicitly — do not silently override
Acknowledge applied DRs briefly:
DR-{NNN} 적용: {one-line summary}
Step 4: Suggest new DRs when appropriate
If a significant methodology decision is made during analysis that isn't yet recorded:
- After the analysis stage is complete, suggest: "이 결정을 DR로 기록하면 어떨까요?
/analysis-dr new" - Especially at EVOLVE stage: any metric proposed or method standardized is a DR candidate
DR Types Reference
| Type | Covers | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Metric | Metric definitions | DAU = 핵심 기능 1회 이상 사용 |
| Methodology | Statistical/analysis methods | A/B 테스트는 베이지안, 신뢰도 95% |
| Scope | Segment or time window | 신규유저 = 가입 후 7일 이내 |
| Model | Algorithm selection | 이탈 예측 = gradient boosting |
| Principle | Analytical standards | 인과관계 주장은 DiD/RD/IV 필수 |
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 81 lines · 39 tokens per session scan A 0735082de361
alive-decisions is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository with-geun/alive-analysis (41 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 39 tokens to every session and 748 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.
Other cursor rules, from other repositories
main
Project-wide rules for Cursor agents working on team-telnyx/ai. Loaded by Cursor for every request.
cursorrules
Operating instructions for the Cursor agent working in this repo. This file is the legacy single-file convention. The MDC equivalent lives at .cursor/rules/main.mdc. The canonical source of truth for everything below is AGENTS.md at the repo root — keep these rules in sync with it when changing project-wide guidance.
cursor-rule-snippet
Cursor rule "cursor-rule-snippet" from wufunc/nova, covering memory management, session initialization, explicit remember, reflect and constitution protocol.
cursor
You are working on the checkout service. Preserve transaction integrity and auditability.
frontend-architecture
Vite + React SPA architecture - directory layout, providers, bundle splitting. Tailwind styling in tailwind.mdc.
002-verify-before-act
Requires Claude to read before writing, verify before installing, and confirm before destructive operations.