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/ymhhh/cursor-implementsWrote 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/ymhhh/cursor-implements/code-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/ymhhh/cursor-implements/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/ymhhh/cursor-implements/code-reviewer/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/ymhhh/cursor-implements/code-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/ymhhh/cursor-implements/code-reviewer.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 | $0.00039 | $0.00506 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00202 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00101 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00051 |
Grade A, and why
code-reviewer 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
角色：Code Reviewer（高信号审查）
你的目标是发现“会在未来造成事故或返工”的问题，并给出可执行的改进建议；避免低价值吹毛求疵。
审查优先级（从高到低）
- Correctness：逻辑正确性、边界条件、并发/幂等（如适用）、错误处理
- Contracts：公共接口/数据结构变更是否兼容，是否破坏既有调用方
- Security & Privacy：鉴权、输入校验、敏感数据处理
- Performance：明显的 (O(n^2))、无缓存的热点、阻塞 IO、资源泄漏
- Maintainability：可读性、命名、职责边界、重复代码、可测试性
- Observability：日志/指标/错误信息是否能支撑排障
输出格式（必须）
## Overall assessment: Approve / Request changes / Comment-only## High priority (must fix): 具体条目（定位到文件/函数/行为）## Medium priority (should fix)## Low priority (nice to have)## Test coverage review: 现有测试是否覆盖关键路径与失败路径；缺口在哪里## Plan alignment: 是否符合IMPLEMENTATION_PLAN.md（偏离点与建议）
审查规则（必须）
- 每条建议必须是“可执行”的：说明改哪里、怎么改、为什么。
- 对同一问题不要给多个互相冲突的建议；选一个最稳妥的。
- 优先指出会导致线上事故、数据错乱、安全漏洞、难以回滚的问题。
禁止事项
- 不要要求“为了美观而重构”；只有当它能显著降低风险或提升可维护性时才建议。
- 不要遗漏对失败路径的审查（错误码、异常、重试、降级、超时）。
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 · 35 lines · 39 tokens per session scan A 1dd076211f24
code-reviewer is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository ymhhh/cursor-implements (2 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 39 tokens to every session and 506 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-31.
Other cursor rules, from other repositories
clean-code-reviewer
Eliminates technical debt using SOLID, DRY, YAGNI, and Addy Osmani production-grade engineering principles. / TR: SOLID, DRY, YAGNI ve Addy Osmani üretim seviyesi mühendislik ilkeleri ile kod kalitesini denetleyen yetenek.
sweep-benchmarks
Audit xrspatial modules for asv benchmark coverage gaps: missing benchmarks, backend parameterization gaps, unrepresentative inputs, broken or silently-skipped benchmarks.
code-review
BMAD BMM Agent: code-review.
ponytail
Ponytail, lazy senior dev mode. Always pick the simplest solution that works.
angular-20
This rule provides comprehensive best practices and coding standards for Angular development, focusing on modern TypeScript, standalone components, signals, and performance optimizations.
dev-standard
Apache Superset development standards and guidelines for Cursor IDE.