RuleStack

Configs

Stacks

Compare

Diff

RuleStack

Configs

Stacks

Compare

Diff

Read API

RuleStack

Configs

Stacks

Compare

Diff

Read API

Diff/thanhtrunggdev-dontbelazy-agent-agents ↔ thanhtrunggdev-dontbelazy-cursor-rules-common-code-review

Comparison

A · AGENTS.md · ThanhTrunggDEV/DontBeLazyB · Cursor rules · ThanhTrunggDEV/DontBeLazy
What each file covers, counted
DimensionSharedOnly in AOnly in BOverlap
Sections113134%
Commands000—
Section tags53250%

What each file covers

Sections

1 shared · 13 only in A · 13 only in B
  • − Everything Claude Code (ECC) — Agent Instructions
  • − Core Principles
  • − Available Agents
  • − Agent Orchestration
  • − Security Guidelines
  • − Coding Style
  • − Testing Requirements
  • − Development Workflow
  • − Workflow Surface Policy
  • − Git Workflow
  • − Architecture Patterns
  • − Project Structure
  • − Success Metrics
  • + Code Review Standards
  • + Purpose
  • + When to Review
  • + Review Checklist
  • + Security Review Triggers
  • + Review Severity Levels
  • + Agent Usage
  • + Review Workflow
  • + Common Issues to Catch
  • + Security
  • + Code Quality
  • + Approval Criteria
  • + Integration with Other Rules
  •   Performance

Commands

neither file has any

Section tags

5 shared · 3 only in A · 2 only in B
  • − build
  • − test
  • − architecture
  • + testing-strategy
  • + do-not
  •   code-style
  •   git-pr
  •   security
  •   performance
  •   agent-behaviour

Line diff

+91 added−133 removed34 unchanged20.4% identical
ThanhTrunggDEV/DontBeLazy · .agent/AGENTS.md
@@ −1 @@
1# Everything Claude Code (ECC) — Agent Instructions
2 
3This is a **production-ready AI coding plugin** providing 48 specialized agents, 183 skills, 79 commands, and automated hook workflows for software development.
4 
5**Version:** 1.10.0
6 
7## Core Principles
8 
91. **Agent-First** — Delegate to specialized agents for domain tasks
102. **Test-Driven** — Write tests before implementation, 80%+ coverage required
113. **Security-First** — Never compromise on security; validate all inputs
124. **Immutability** — Always create new objects, never mutate existing ones
135. **Plan Before Execute** — Plan complex features before writing code
14 
15## Available Agents
 
 
 
 
16 
17| Agent | Purpose | When to Use |
18|-------|---------|-------------|
19| planner | Implementation planning | Complex features, refactoring |
20| architect | System design and scalability | Architectural decisions |
21| tdd-guide | Test-driven development | New features, bug fixes |
22| code-reviewer | Code quality and maintainability | After writing/modifying code |
23| security-reviewer | Vulnerability detection | Before commits, sensitive code |
24| build-error-resolver | Fix build/type errors | When build fails |
25| e2e-runner | End-to-end Playwright testing | Critical user flows |
26| refactor-cleaner | Dead code cleanup | Code maintenance |
27| doc-updater | Documentation and codemaps | Updating docs |
28| cpp-reviewer | C/C++ code review | C and C++ projects |
29| cpp-build-resolver | C/C++ build errors | C and C++ build failures |
30| docs-lookup | Documentation lookup via Context7 | API/docs questions |
31| go-reviewer | Go code review | Go projects |
32| go-build-resolver | Go build errors | Go build failures |
33| kotlin-reviewer | Kotlin code review | Kotlin/Android/KMP projects |
34| kotlin-build-resolver | Kotlin/Gradle build errors | Kotlin build failures |
35| database-reviewer | PostgreSQL/Supabase specialist | Schema design, query optimization |
36| python-reviewer | Python code review | Python projects |
37| java-reviewer | Java and Spring Boot code review | Java/Spring Boot projects |
38| java-build-resolver | Java/Maven/Gradle build errors | Java build failures |
39| loop-operator | Autonomous loop execution | Run loops safely, monitor stalls, intervene |
40| harness-optimizer | Harness config tuning | Reliability, cost, throughput |
41| rust-reviewer | Rust code review | Rust projects |
42| rust-build-resolver | Rust build errors | Rust build failures |
43| pytorch-build-resolver | PyTorch runtime/CUDA/training errors | PyTorch build/training failures |
44| typescript-reviewer | TypeScript/JavaScript code review | TypeScript/JavaScript projects |
45 
46## Agent Orchestration
47 
48Use agents proactively without user prompt:
49- Complex feature requests → **planner**
50- Code just written/modified → **code-reviewer**
51- Bug fix or new feature → **tdd-guide**
52- Architectural decision → **architect**
53- Security-sensitive code → **security-reviewer**
54- Autonomous loops / loop monitoring → **loop-operator**
55- Harness config reliability and cost → **harness-optimizer**
56 
57Use parallel execution for independent operations — launch multiple agents simultaneously.
58 
59## Security Guidelines
60 
61**Before ANY commit:**
62- No hardcoded secrets (API keys, passwords, tokens)
63- All user inputs validated
64- SQL injection prevention (parameterized queries)
65- XSS prevention (sanitized HTML)
66- CSRF protection enabled
67- Authentication/authorization verified
68- Rate limiting on all endpoints
69- Error messages don't leak sensitive data
70 
71**Secret management:** NEVER hardcode secrets. Use environment variables or a secret manager. Validate required secrets at startup. Rotate any exposed secrets immediately.
72 
73**If security issue found:** STOP → use security-reviewer agent → fix CRITICAL issues → rotate exposed secrets → review codebase for similar issues.
74 
75## Coding Style
 
 
 
 
 
 
76 
77**Immutability (CRITICAL):** Always create new objects, never mutate. Return new copies with changes applied.
78 
79**File organization:** Many small files over few large ones. 200-400 lines typical, 800 max. Organize by feature/domain, not by type. High cohesion, low coupling.
 
 
 
 
 
80 
81**Error handling:** Handle errors at every level. Provide user-friendly messages in UI code. Log detailed context server-side. Never silently swallow errors.
82 
83**Input validation:** Validate all user input at system boundaries. Use schema-based validation. Fail fast with clear messages. Never trust external data.
84 
85**Code quality checklist:**
86- Functions small (<50 lines), files focused (<800 lines)
87- No deep nesting (>4 levels)
88- Proper error handling, no hardcoded values
89- Readable, well-named identifiers
 
 
 
90 
91## Testing Requirements
92 
93**Minimum coverage: 80%**
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
94 
95Test types (all required):
961. **Unit tests** — Individual functions, utilities, components
972. **Integration tests** — API endpoints, database operations
983. **E2E tests** — Critical user flows
99 
100**TDD workflow (mandatory):**
1011. Write test first (RED) — test should FAIL
1022. Write minimal implementation (GREEN) — test should PASS
1033. Refactor (IMPROVE) — verify coverage 80%+
104 
105Troubleshoot failures: check test isolation → verify mocks → fix implementation (not tests, unless tests are wrong).
 
 
 
 
 
106 
107## Development Workflow
108 
1091. **Plan** — Use planner agent, identify dependencies and risks, break into phases
1102. **TDD** — Use tdd-guide agent, write tests first, implement, refactor
1113. **Review** — Use code-reviewer agent immediately, address CRITICAL/HIGH issues
1124. **Capture knowledge in the right place**
113 - Personal debugging notes, preferences, and temporary context → auto memory
114 - Team/project knowledge (architecture decisions, API changes, runbooks) → the project's existing docs structure
115 - If the current task already produces the relevant docs or code comments, do not duplicate the same information elsewhere
116 - If there is no obvious project doc location, ask before creating a new top-level file
1175. **Commit** — Conventional commits format, comprehensive PR summaries
118 
119## Workflow Surface Policy
120 
121- `skills/` is the canonical workflow surface.
122- New workflow contributions should land in `skills/` first.
123- `commands/` is a legacy slash-entry compatibility surface and should only be added or updated when a shim is still required for migration or cross-harness parity.
 
124 
125## Git Workflow
126 
127**Commit format:** `<type>: <description>` — Types: feat, fix, refactor, docs, test, chore, perf, ci
 
 
128 
129**PR workflow:** Analyze full commit history → draft comprehensive summary → include test plan → push with `-u` flag.
130 
131## Architecture Patterns
132 
133**API response format:** Consistent envelope with success indicator, data payload, error message, and pagination metadata.
134 
135**Repository pattern:** Encapsulate data access behind standard interface (findAll, findById, create, update, delete). Business logic depends on abstract interface, not storage mechanism.
136 
137**Skeleton projects:** Search for battle-tested templates, evaluate with parallel agents (security, extensibility, relevance), clone best match, iterate within proven structure.
138 
139## Performance
140 
141**Context management:** Avoid last 20% of context window for large refactoring and multi-file features. Lower-sensitivity tasks (single edits, docs, simple fixes) tolerate higher utilization.
142 
143**Build troubleshooting:** Use build-error-resolver agent → analyze errors → fix incrementally → verify after each fix.
144 
145## Project Structure
146 
147```
148agents/ — 48 specialized subagents
149skills/ — 183 workflow skills and domain knowledge
150commands/ — 79 slash commands
151hooks/ — Trigger-based automations
152rules/ — Always-follow guidelines (common + per-language)
153scripts/ — Cross-platform Node.js utilities
154mcp-configs/ — 14 MCP server configurations
155tests/ — Test suite
156```
157 
158`commands/` remains in the repo for compatibility, but the long-term direction is skills-first.
159 
160## Success Metrics
161 
162- All tests pass with 80%+ coverage
163- No security vulnerabilities
164- Code is readable and maintainable
165- Performance is acceptable
166- User requirements are met
167 
ThanhTrunggDEV/DontBeLazy · .cursor/rules/common-code-review.mdc
@@ +1 @@
1# Code Review Standards
2 
3## Purpose
4 
5Code review ensures quality, security, and maintainability before code is merged. This rule defines when and how to conduct code reviews.
6 
7## When to Review
8 
9**MANDATORY review triggers:**
 
 
 
 
10 
11- After writing or modifying code
12- Before any commit to shared branches
13- When security-sensitive code is changed (auth, payments, user data)
14- When architectural changes are made
15- Before merging pull requests
16 
17**Pre-Review Requirements:**
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
18 
19Before requesting review, ensure:
20 
21- All automated checks (CI/CD) are passing
22- Merge conflicts are resolved
23- Branch is up to date with target branch
 
 
 
 
 
24 
25## Review Checklist
26 
27Before marking code complete:
28 
29- [ ] Code is readable and well-named
30- [ ] Functions are focused (<50 lines)
31- [ ] Files are cohesive (<800 lines)
32- [ ] No deep nesting (>4 levels)
33- [ ] Errors are handled explicitly
34- [ ] No hardcoded secrets or credentials
35- [ ] No console.log or debug statements
36- [ ] Tests exist for new functionality
37- [ ] Test coverage meets 80% minimum
38 
39## Security Review Triggers
40 
41**STOP and use security-reviewer agent when:**
42 
43- Authentication or authorization code
44- User input handling
45- Database queries
46- File system operations
47- External API calls
48- Cryptographic operations
49- Payment or financial code
50 
51## Review Severity Levels
52 
53| Level | Meaning | Action |
54|-------|---------|--------|
55| CRITICAL | Security vulnerability or data loss risk | **BLOCK** - Must fix before merge |
56| HIGH | Bug or significant quality issue | **WARN** - Should fix before merge |
57| MEDIUM | Maintainability concern | **INFO** - Consider fixing |
58| LOW | Style or minor suggestion | **NOTE** - Optional |
59 
60## Agent Usage
61 
62Use these agents for code review:
63 
64| Agent | Purpose |
65|-------|---------|
66| **code-reviewer** | General code quality, patterns, best practices |
67| **security-reviewer** | Security vulnerabilities, OWASP Top 10 |
68| **typescript-reviewer** | TypeScript/JavaScript specific issues |
69| **python-reviewer** | Python specific issues |
70| **go-reviewer** | Go specific issues |
71| **rust-reviewer** | Rust specific issues |
72 
73## Review Workflow
74 
75```
761. Run git diff to understand changes
772. Check security checklist first
783. Review code quality checklist
794. Run relevant tests
805. Verify coverage >= 80%
816. Use appropriate agent for detailed review
82```
83 
84## Common Issues to Catch
 
 
 
85 
86### Security
 
 
 
87 
88- Hardcoded credentials (API keys, passwords, tokens)
89- SQL injection (string concatenation in queries)
90- XSS vulnerabilities (unescaped user input)
91- Path traversal (unsanitized file paths)
92- CSRF protection missing
93- Authentication bypasses
94 
95### Code Quality
96 
97- Large functions (>50 lines) - split into smaller
98- Large files (>800 lines) - extract modules
99- Deep nesting (>4 levels) - use early returns
100- Missing error handling - handle explicitly
101- Mutation patterns - prefer immutable operations
102- Missing tests - add test coverage
 
 
 
103 
104### Performance
105 
106- N+1 queries - use JOINs or batching
107- Missing pagination - add LIMIT to queries
108- Unbounded queries - add constraints
109- Missing caching - cache expensive operations
110 
111## Approval Criteria
112 
113- **Approve**: No CRITICAL or HIGH issues
114- **Warning**: Only HIGH issues (merge with caution)
115- **Block**: CRITICAL issues found
116 
117## Integration with Other Rules
118 
119This rule works with:
120 
121- [testing.md](testing.md) - Test coverage requirements
122- [security.md](security.md) - Security checklist
123- [git-workflow.md](git-workflow.md) - Commit standards
124- [agents.md](agents.md) - Agent delegation
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
125 
@@ −1 +1 @@
1−# Everything Claude Code (ECC) — Agent Instructions
1+# Code Review Standards
22  
3−This is a **production-ready AI coding plugin** providing 48 specialized agents, 183 skills, 79 commands, and automated hook workflows for software development.
3+## Purpose
44  
5−**Version:** 1.10.0
5+Code review ensures quality, security, and maintainability before code is merged. This rule defines when and how to conduct code reviews.
66  
7−## Core Principles
7+## When to Review
88  
9−1. **Agent-First** — Delegate to specialized agents for domain tasks
10−2. **Test-Driven** — Write tests before implementation, 80%+ coverage required
11−3. **Security-First** — Never compromise on security; validate all inputs
12−4. **Immutability** — Always create new objects, never mutate existing ones
13−5. **Plan Before Execute** — Plan complex features before writing code
9+**MANDATORY review triggers:**
1410  
15−## Available Agents
11+- After writing or modifying code
12+- Before any commit to shared branches
13+- When security-sensitive code is changed (auth, payments, user data)
14+- When architectural changes are made
15+- Before merging pull requests
1616  
17−| Agent | Purpose | When to Use |
18−|-------|---------|-------------|
19−| planner | Implementation planning | Complex features, refactoring |
20−| architect | System design and scalability | Architectural decisions |
21−| tdd-guide | Test-driven development | New features, bug fixes |
22−| code-reviewer | Code quality and maintainability | After writing/modifying code |
23−| security-reviewer | Vulnerability detection | Before commits, sensitive code |
24−| build-error-resolver | Fix build/type errors | When build fails |
25−| e2e-runner | End-to-end Playwright testing | Critical user flows |
26−| refactor-cleaner | Dead code cleanup | Code maintenance |
27−| doc-updater | Documentation and codemaps | Updating docs |
28−| cpp-reviewer | C/C++ code review | C and C++ projects |
29−| cpp-build-resolver | C/C++ build errors | C and C++ build failures |
30−| docs-lookup | Documentation lookup via Context7 | API/docs questions |
31−| go-reviewer | Go code review | Go projects |
32−| go-build-resolver | Go build errors | Go build failures |
33−| kotlin-reviewer | Kotlin code review | Kotlin/Android/KMP projects |
34−| kotlin-build-resolver | Kotlin/Gradle build errors | Kotlin build failures |
35−| database-reviewer | PostgreSQL/Supabase specialist | Schema design, query optimization |
36−| python-reviewer | Python code review | Python projects |
37−| java-reviewer | Java and Spring Boot code review | Java/Spring Boot projects |
38−| java-build-resolver | Java/Maven/Gradle build errors | Java build failures |
39−| loop-operator | Autonomous loop execution | Run loops safely, monitor stalls, intervene |
40−| harness-optimizer | Harness config tuning | Reliability, cost, throughput |
41−| rust-reviewer | Rust code review | Rust projects |
42−| rust-build-resolver | Rust build errors | Rust build failures |
43−| pytorch-build-resolver | PyTorch runtime/CUDA/training errors | PyTorch build/training failures |
44−| typescript-reviewer | TypeScript/JavaScript code review | TypeScript/JavaScript projects |
17+**Pre-Review Requirements:**
4518  
46−## Agent Orchestration
19+Before requesting review, ensure:
4720  
48−Use agents proactively without user prompt:
49−- Complex feature requests → **planner**
50−- Code just written/modified → **code-reviewer**
51−- Bug fix or new feature → **tdd-guide**
52−- Architectural decision → **architect**
53−- Security-sensitive code → **security-reviewer**
54−- Autonomous loops / loop monitoring → **loop-operator**
55−- Harness config reliability and cost → **harness-optimizer**
21+- All automated checks (CI/CD) are passing
22+- Merge conflicts are resolved
23+- Branch is up to date with target branch
5624  
57−Use parallel execution for independent operations — launch multiple agents simultaneously.
25+## Review Checklist
5826  
59−## Security Guidelines
27+Before marking code complete:
6028  
61−**Before ANY commit:**
62−- No hardcoded secrets (API keys, passwords, tokens)
63−- All user inputs validated
64−- SQL injection prevention (parameterized queries)
65−- XSS prevention (sanitized HTML)
66−- CSRF protection enabled
67−- Authentication/authorization verified
68−- Rate limiting on all endpoints
69−- Error messages don't leak sensitive data
29+- [ ] Code is readable and well-named
30+- [ ] Functions are focused (<50 lines)
31+- [ ] Files are cohesive (<800 lines)
32+- [ ] No deep nesting (>4 levels)
33+- [ ] Errors are handled explicitly
34+- [ ] No hardcoded secrets or credentials
35+- [ ] No console.log or debug statements
36+- [ ] Tests exist for new functionality
37+- [ ] Test coverage meets 80% minimum
7038  
71−**Secret management:** NEVER hardcode secrets. Use environment variables or a secret manager. Validate required secrets at startup. Rotate any exposed secrets immediately.
39+## Security Review Triggers
7240  
73−**If security issue found:** STOP → use security-reviewer agent → fix CRITICAL issues → rotate exposed secrets → review codebase for similar issues.
41+**STOP and use security-reviewer agent when:**
7442  
75−## Coding Style
43+- Authentication or authorization code
44+- User input handling
45+- Database queries
46+- File system operations
47+- External API calls
48+- Cryptographic operations
49+- Payment or financial code
7650  
77−**Immutability (CRITICAL):** Always create new objects, never mutate. Return new copies with changes applied.
51+## Review Severity Levels
7852  
79−**File organization:** Many small files over few large ones. 200-400 lines typical, 800 max. Organize by feature/domain, not by type. High cohesion, low coupling.
53+| Level | Meaning | Action |
54+|-------|---------|--------|
55+| CRITICAL | Security vulnerability or data loss risk | **BLOCK** - Must fix before merge |
56+| HIGH | Bug or significant quality issue | **WARN** - Should fix before merge |
57+| MEDIUM | Maintainability concern | **INFO** - Consider fixing |
58+| LOW | Style or minor suggestion | **NOTE** - Optional |
8059  
81−**Error handling:** Handle errors at every level. Provide user-friendly messages in UI code. Log detailed context server-side. Never silently swallow errors.
60+## Agent Usage
8261  
83−**Input validation:** Validate all user input at system boundaries. Use schema-based validation. Fail fast with clear messages. Never trust external data.
62+Use these agents for code review:
8463  
85−**Code quality checklist:**
86−- Functions small (<50 lines), files focused (<800 lines)
87−- No deep nesting (>4 levels)
88−- Proper error handling, no hardcoded values
89−- Readable, well-named identifiers
64+| Agent | Purpose |
65+|-------|---------|
66+| **code-reviewer** | General code quality, patterns, best practices |
67+| **security-reviewer** | Security vulnerabilities, OWASP Top 10 |
68+| **typescript-reviewer** | TypeScript/JavaScript specific issues |
69+| **python-reviewer** | Python specific issues |
70+| **go-reviewer** | Go specific issues |
71+| **rust-reviewer** | Rust specific issues |
9072  
91−## Testing Requirements
73+## Review Workflow
9274  
93−**Minimum coverage: 80%**
75+```
76+1. Run git diff to understand changes
77+2. Check security checklist first
78+3. Review code quality checklist
79+4. Run relevant tests
80+5. Verify coverage >= 80%
81+6. Use appropriate agent for detailed review
82+```
9483  
95−Test types (all required):
96−1. **Unit tests** — Individual functions, utilities, components
97−2. **Integration tests** — API endpoints, database operations
98−3. **E2E tests** — Critical user flows
84+## Common Issues to Catch
9985  
100−**TDD workflow (mandatory):**
101−1. Write test first (RED) — test should FAIL
102−2. Write minimal implementation (GREEN) — test should PASS
103−3. Refactor (IMPROVE) — verify coverage 80%+
86+### Security
10487  
105−Troubleshoot failures: check test isolation → verify mocks → fix implementation (not tests, unless tests are wrong).
88+- Hardcoded credentials (API keys, passwords, tokens)
89+- SQL injection (string concatenation in queries)
90+- XSS vulnerabilities (unescaped user input)
91+- Path traversal (unsanitized file paths)
92+- CSRF protection missing
93+- Authentication bypasses
10694  
107−## Development Workflow
95+### Code Quality
10896  
109−1. **Plan** — Use planner agent, identify dependencies and risks, break into phases
110−2. **TDD** — Use tdd-guide agent, write tests first, implement, refactor
111−3. **Review** — Use code-reviewer agent immediately, address CRITICAL/HIGH issues
112−4. **Capture knowledge in the right place**
113− - Personal debugging notes, preferences, and temporary context → auto memory
114− - Team/project knowledge (architecture decisions, API changes, runbooks) → the project's existing docs structure
115− - If the current task already produces the relevant docs or code comments, do not duplicate the same information elsewhere
116− - If there is no obvious project doc location, ask before creating a new top-level file
117−5. **Commit** — Conventional commits format, comprehensive PR summaries
97+- Large functions (>50 lines) - split into smaller
98+- Large files (>800 lines) - extract modules
99+- Deep nesting (>4 levels) - use early returns
100+- Missing error handling - handle explicitly
101+- Mutation patterns - prefer immutable operations
102+- Missing tests - add test coverage
118103  
119−## Workflow Surface Policy
104+### Performance
120105  
121−- `skills/` is the canonical workflow surface.
122−- New workflow contributions should land in `skills/` first.
123−- `commands/` is a legacy slash-entry compatibility surface and should only be added or updated when a shim is still required for migration or cross-harness parity.
106+- N+1 queries - use JOINs or batching
107+- Missing pagination - add LIMIT to queries
108+- Unbounded queries - add constraints
109+- Missing caching - cache expensive operations
124110  
125−## Git Workflow
111+## Approval Criteria
126112  
127−**Commit format:** `<type>: <description>` — Types: feat, fix, refactor, docs, test, chore, perf, ci
113+- **Approve**: No CRITICAL or HIGH issues
114+- **Warning**: Only HIGH issues (merge with caution)
115+- **Block**: CRITICAL issues found
128116  
129−**PR workflow:** Analyze full commit history → draft comprehensive summary → include test plan → push with `-u` flag.
117+## Integration with Other Rules
130118  
131−## Architecture Patterns
119+This rule works with:
132120  
133−**API response format:** Consistent envelope with success indicator, data payload, error message, and pagination metadata.
134− 
135−**Repository pattern:** Encapsulate data access behind standard interface (findAll, findById, create, update, delete). Business logic depends on abstract interface, not storage mechanism.
136− 
137−**Skeleton projects:** Search for battle-tested templates, evaluate with parallel agents (security, extensibility, relevance), clone best match, iterate within proven structure.
138− 
139−## Performance
140− 
141−**Context management:** Avoid last 20% of context window for large refactoring and multi-file features. Lower-sensitivity tasks (single edits, docs, simple fixes) tolerate higher utilization.
142− 
143−**Build troubleshooting:** Use build-error-resolver agent → analyze errors → fix incrementally → verify after each fix.
144− 
145−## Project Structure
146− 
147−```
148−agents/ — 48 specialized subagents
149−skills/ — 183 workflow skills and domain knowledge
150−commands/ — 79 slash commands
151−hooks/ — Trigger-based automations
152−rules/ — Always-follow guidelines (common + per-language)
153−scripts/ — Cross-platform Node.js utilities
154−mcp-configs/ — 14 MCP server configurations
155−tests/ — Test suite
156−```
157− 
158−`commands/` remains in the repo for compatibility, but the long-term direction is skills-first.
159− 
160−## Success Metrics
161− 
162−- All tests pass with 80%+ coverage
163−- No security vulnerabilities
164−- Code is readable and maintainable
165−- Performance is acceptable
166−- User requirements are met
121+- [testing.md](testing.md) - Test coverage requirements
122+- [security.md](security.md) - Security checklist
123+- [git-workflow.md](git-workflow.md) - Commit standards
124+- [agents.md](agents.md) - Agent delegation
167125  
RuleStack

Built by

Kynth Studio

Directory

Configs
Stacks
Compare formats
Diff two configs
Best AGENTS.md examples

Formats

AGENTS.md
CLAUDE.md
Cursor rules
Copilot instructions

Reference

Read API
Corpus health
Privacy Policy
Terms

RuleStack

RuleStack

Built by

Kynth Studio

Directory

Configs
Stacks
Compare formats
Diff two configs
Best AGENTS.md examples

Formats

AGENTS.md
CLAUDE.md
Cursor rules
Copilot instructions

Reference

Read API
Corpus health
Privacy Policy
Terms

RuleStack

RuleStack

Built by

Kynth Studio

Directory

Configs
Stacks
Compare formats
Diff two configs
Best AGENTS.md examples

Formats

AGENTS.md
CLAUDE.md
Cursor rules
Copilot instructions

Reference

Read API
Corpus health
Privacy Policy
Terms

RuleStack