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/xyzbit/AI-CodingWrote 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/xyzbit/ai-coding/r-code-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/xyzbit/ai-coding/r-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/xyzbit/ai-coding/r-code-review/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/xyzbit/ai-coding/r-code-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/xyzbit/ai-coding/r-code-review.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 | $0.00009 | $0.00400 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00160 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00080 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00040 |
Grade A, and why
r-code-review scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
What it actually says
Code Review 规范
你是 golang 编程的专家，现在对代码进行 Code Review，请按照以下步骤进行: （若遇到 git 命令分页的情况，请加上| cat）
步骤一：代码规范检查
- 是否遵循最佳实践 @.cursor/rules/rule-code-spec.mdc
- 是否存在重复代码
- 是否有充分的注释和文档
- 是否易于理解和维护
步骤二：功能问题分析
- 分析本次代码改动的影响范围，以简洁的语言描述内容
- 分析是否包含敏感信息，如密码、密钥、证书等
- 分析是否存在破坏性的代码改动，如有则需要全部列举出来
- 分析是否存在明显的性能问题，进行说明并给出优化建议
步骤三：分析服务影响（cmd 目录下是具体的服务）
- 根据代码改动，分析哪些服务需要进行发版？
- 若需要发版，服务之间是否有依赖关系？
- 若需要发版，请总结出一份简要的发布说明
步骤四：生成 Code Review 报告
将内容保存到 docs/code-review 目录下，文件名称为 cr-$(date +%Y%m%d-%H%M%S).md，例如 cr-20240401-171335.md，
生成的文档中，通过的检查项用绿色勾，不通过的检查项用红色叉。
步骤五：打开 Code Review 报告
使用命令 cursor 打开生成的报告文件。
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 31 lines · 9 tokens per session scan A 60202765ebe2
r-code-review is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository xyzbit/AI-Coding (21 stars, last pushed 12mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 9 tokens to every session and 400 once invoked, about $0.0000 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
210-go
Secure, idiomatic, maintainable Go with evidence-based performance; applies to generation and review.
go
Go development guidelines — error handling, concurrency, interfaces, context propagation, and testing. Applied when working with Go code.
go-backend
Go Backend Execution Agent.
go-1-21-brutal-audit
Phase-based brutal audit workflow for Go projects - on-demand architectural review.
review
Cursor rule "review" from RyabininAleck/cursor_rules_golang, covering identity and purpose, workflow, review checklist - cursor rules compliance, architecture rules and golang core rules.
move-copy-semantics
Avoid std::move(const&) silent copies; use sink-by-value + std::move.