Add Shipworthy production engineering guardrails cursorrules

[Vimalk0703]

Adds a .cursorrules file with production engineering guardrails from Shipworthy.

Covers: TDD workflow, input validation (Zod/Pydantic), structured logging, proper HTTP status codes, real databases, security checks, intent-to-spec generation, project diagnosis, and quality gates.

Added to the Other section alphabetically.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Documentation
  • Added a Production Guardrails guide outlining enforced development standards: test-driven development, input validation, structured logging, proper HTTP status codes, persistent databases, secret handling/startup validation, secure password hashing, client-safe error messages, required linting and coverage, an "intent-to-spec" step for non-trivial features, session checklist, routing instructions for work types, and quality gate verification.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: e43d505c-3cd3-40c9-a243-795ffb93b90e

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between b397f88 and 6b57b8a.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• README.md
• rules/shipworthy-production-guardrails/.cursorrules

✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (2)

• README.md
• rules/shipworthy-production-guardrails/.cursorrules

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

Added a new "Shipworthy Production Guardrails" Cursor rules entry in the README and a new rules file that codifies production engineering requirements: TDD, input validation, structured logging, HTTP status conventions, enforced persistence, secret handling, linting, type-safety, testing, and verification steps.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Documentation README.md	Inserted a new "Shipworthy Production Guardrails" entry under the "Other" rules list linking to the new rules file.
Guardrails rules rules/shipworthy-production-guardrails/.cursorrules	Added new Cursor rules defining production guardrails: testing and coverage requirements, mandatory input validation (Zod for TS), prohibition of console.log and any, linting, structured logging, HTTP status conventions, database persistence requirement, secret validation, secure password hashing, client-safe errors, intent-to-spec process, session checklist, skill routing, and verification proof steps.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes

Suggested reviewers

• PatrickJS

Poem

🐇 I hop through code with careful paws,

I stitch the rules and mind the laws,
Tests and checks, no secrets kept,
Production dreams are safely prepped,
A rabbit's nod — the guardrails set.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title directly and accurately summarizes the main change: adding a new Cursor rules file for production engineering guardrails from the Shipworthy project.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)

rules/shipworthy-production-guardrails/.cursorrules (1)

15-15: Consider clarifying the scope of the database requirement.

The rule "ALWAYS use a database — never in-memory arrays. SQLite minimum" is quite strict and may not apply to all scenarios (e.g., in-memory caching layers, certain microservices, prototypes). While appropriate for production data persistence, you might consider adding a brief qualifier like "for persistent data" to clarify when this rule applies.

💡 Optional clarification

-7. **ALWAYS use a database** — never in-memory arrays. SQLite minimum.
+7. **ALWAYS use a database for persistent data** — never in-memory arrays. SQLite minimum.

This clarifies that the rule applies to data that needs to persist, while not preventing legitimate in-memory caching or ephemeral data structures.

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In `@rules/shipworthy-production-guardrails/.cursorrules` at line 15, Update the
rule text that currently reads "ALWAYS use a database — never in-memory arrays.
SQLite minimum." to add a scope qualifier such as "for persistent data" (e.g.,
"ALWAYS use a database for persistent data — never in-memory arrays; SQLite
minimum.") so the rule applies to persistence only and does not block legitimate
in-memory caches or ephemeral structures; locate and edit the rule string
"ALWAYS use a database — never in-memory arrays. SQLite minimum." in
.cursorrules and replace it with the clarified phrasing.

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

Inline comments:
In `@README.md`:
- Line 272: The README's "Shipworthy Production Guardrails" entry in the "Other"
category is out of alphabetical order; move the markdown list item "-
[Shipworthy Production
Guardrails](./rules/shipworthy-production-guardrails/.cursorrules)" so it
appears after the "Next.js (Type LLM)" entry and before the "Unity (C#)" entry
within the "Other" category, and remove its original occurrence between "Code
Guidelines" and "Code Style Consistency" so the category remains alphabetically
sorted.

---

Nitpick comments:
In `@rules/shipworthy-production-guardrails/.cursorrules`:
- Line 15: Update the rule text that currently reads "ALWAYS use a database —
never in-memory arrays. SQLite minimum." to add a scope qualifier such as "for
persistent data" (e.g., "ALWAYS use a database for persistent data — never
in-memory arrays; SQLite minimum.") so the rule applies to persistence only and
does not block legitimate in-memory caches or ephemeral structures; locate and
edit the rule string "ALWAYS use a database — never in-memory arrays. SQLite
minimum." in .cursorrules and replace it with the clarified phrasing.

🪄 Autofix (Beta)

Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:

• Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
• Create a new PR with the fixes

---

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 8d77555c-c405-46d1-b02e-aa6ae1f35b12

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between fc2ce04 and b397f88.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• README.md
• rules/shipworthy-production-guardrails/.cursorrules

[Vimalk0703]

Thanks for the review @coderabbitai! Both items have been fixed:

1. Alphabetical ordering — Moved the Shipworthy entry to the correct position (after "Next.js (Type LLM)", before "Unity (C#)")
2. Database rule clarification — Updated to "ALWAYS use a database for persistent data" to avoid blocking legitimate in-memory caching

See commit 6b57b8a.

[coderabbitai]

Tip

For best results, initiate chat on the files or code changes.

🧩 Analysis chain

🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bash
# Check alphabetical ordering around the Shipworthy entry in README.md
grep -n -i "shipworthy\|next.js (type llm)\|unity (c#)" README.md

echo "---"

# Check the database rule in the .cursorrules file
grep -n -i "database\|always use" rules/shipworthy-production-guardrails/.cursorrules

Length of output: 953

---

@Vimalk0703 Both fixes are confirmed in the current state of the branch! ✅

1. Alphabetical ordering — The entry sits correctly between Next.js (Type LLM) (line 276) and Unity (C#) (line 278). ✓
2. Database rule clarification — Line 15 of the .cursorrules file now reads "ALWAYS use a database for persistent data — never in-memory arrays. SQLite minimum." ✓

Thanks for addressing these promptly!

---

If you found this review helpful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on X?

Thank you for using CodeRabbit!