Skip to lesson
Exit
Cursor team workflows in a shared repo1 / 2

1 min lesson

The progression every team walks

Respond to "Why is moving conventions from personal prompts into Project Rules described as governance rather than convenience?" Name the reason and the detail behind it.

Step 1 of 2

The progression every team walksad-hoc → governed

  1. 1Personal prompts. Each dev has their own habits. They live in one head and leave when that person does. Nothing accrues to the team.
  2. 2Shared Project RulesVersion-controlled instructions in the repo that every Cursor agent interaction inherits, so standards are encoded once. Press Enter for the full definition. / `AGENTS.md`. The conventions move into the repo and the model behaves consistently regardless of who's driving.
  3. 3Shared skills. Repeatable, named workflows (generate-test, scaffold-endpoint) so the how is encoded once instead of re-typed fifty times.
  4. 4Scoped context + ignore controls. You engineer what the agent reaches for by default, so it pulls the right files and leaves secret-bearing paths out of ordinary context.
  5. 5Plan-first, reviewable handoffs. The agent proposes, a human approves and the diff stays small enough to actually read.

Each step trades a little spontaneity for a lot of repeatability. The mature team treats its Cursor configuration the way it treats CI config or lint rules:

  • It's part of the codebase.
  • It goes through review.
  • It's an ITGCIT General Controls. The baseline IT controls auditors check: who can change what, how changes get approved and how systems are run. Press Enter for the full definition.-adjacent control surface rather than a sticky note.
Say it like this

"A prompt is a personal asset. A Project Rule is a team control. We don't scale prompting - we scale the rules that make everyone's prompting converge."