Skip to content

robobobby/agentlint

Folders and files

NameName
Last commit message
Last commit date

Latest commit

 

History

5 Commits
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Repository files navigation

AgentLint

Audit and score your AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, .cursorrules, or any agent context file against a research-backed rubric.

Try it live →

What it does

Scores your agent context file across 16 categories grouped into 3 pillars:

  • 🔧 Functional (35%): Build commands, implementation details, architecture, code style, testing, dependencies
  • 🛡️ Safety (40%): Security, performance, error handling, environment
  • 📋 Meta (25%): Documentation, communication, workflow, constraints, examples, versioning

Safety weighs the most because research found that only 14.5% of 2,303 context files specify security or performance rules.

Quick Start

Web UI

Visit robobobby.github.io/agentlint and paste your file. Everything runs client-side, nothing leaves your browser.

You can also fetch directly from a GitHub URL (paste any repo's blob URL and it converts to raw automatically).

CLI (Python, zero dependencies)

# Score a file
python3 agentlint.py AGENTS.md

# JSON output
python3 agentlint.py CLAUDE.md --json --pretty

# HTML report
python3 agentlint.py .cursorrules --html > report.html

# From stdin
cat AGENTS.md | python3 agentlint.py -

Install via pip

pip install agentlint
agentlint AGENTS.md

Scoring

Each category gets 0-10 based on:

  • Pattern matching: Relevant keywords, commands, and structural markers
  • Signal density: More instances raise confidence (with diminishing returns via log2)
  • Header bonus: Dedicated sections score higher than scattered mentions

Overall grade: A+ through F, derived from weighted pillar averages.

The 16 Categories

# Category Pillar Study Prevalence
1 Build & Run Commands Functional 62.3%
2 Implementation Details Functional 69.9%
3 Architecture Functional 67.7%
4 Code Style Functional ~55%
5 Testing Functional ~50%
6 Dependencies Functional ~40%
7 Security Safety 14.5%
8 Performance Safety 14.5%
9 Error Handling Safety ~25%
10 Environment Safety ~35%
11 Documentation Meta ~45%
12 Communication Meta ~40%
13 Workflow Meta ~50%
14 Constraints & Boundaries Meta ~30%
15 Examples Meta ~35%
16 Versioning & Maintenance Meta ~20%

Badge

After auditing, grab a badge for your README:

[![AgentLint: A](https://img.shields.io/badge/AgentLint-A%20(8.2%2F10)-brightgreen)](https://github.com/robobobby/agentlint)

The web UI generates the badge markdown automatically.

Research Basis

The rubric is derived from "Agent READMEs: An Empirical Study of Context Files for Agentic Coding" (2025), which analyzed 2,303 context files from 1,925 repositories across Claude Code, OpenAI Codex, and GitHub Copilot.

Zero Dependencies

  • CLI: Pure Python 3.10+ stdlib. No pip install needed.
  • Web: Single HTML file. No build step. No framework. No tracking.

Part of the Agent Quality Toolkit

Tool What it tests Link
AgentLint Agent configuration files Config quality
AgentEval Agent conversation behavior robobobby.github.io/agenteval

AgentLint checks your agent's configuration. AgentEval checks your agent's behavior. Use both.

License

MIT

About

Audit and score your AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, or .cursorrules against a research-backed rubric. 16 categories, 3 pillars, zero dependencies.

Topics

Resources

License

Stars

Watchers

Forks

Releases

No releases published

Packages

 
 
 

Contributors