You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
Next agent surfaces: Cursor, Windsurf, Gemini CLI #78
With agentrust-capture-core published and four engines on it, a new surface is a path declaration plus a report rather than another engine.
The three worth doing next are all repository-resident like Copilot rather than home-directory-resident like Claude Code and Codex, which means they take the same shape as copilot/: a pull-request status check with a committed baseline, reviewed like code and enforceable through branch protection.
Surface
Likely paths
Cursor
.cursor/rules/**, .cursorrules, MCP config
Windsurf
rules directory, MCP config
Gemini CLI
GEMINI.md, plus whatever settings file it reads
Precedent from #68: verify the paths against each vendor's current documentation before building. Doing that for Copilot changed the design, because AGENTS.md turned out to be read from anywhere in the tree rather than just the root, and skills resolve from three roots rather than one. A root-only check would have missed the most interesting drift.
Also from #68: skills go through core.tree_digest so the manifest-only bypass from #63 and #65 cannot reappear, and vendored directories are excluded so a dependency shipping its own rules file is not counted as the repository's own.
I'd like to take this, all three surfaces (Cursor, Windsurf, Gemini CLI) as one PR since they share the repository-resident shape #68 already established for Copilot.
Plan, following the same order #68 used: verify each vendor's current path/config documentation first, since that is what actually changed the Copilot design (AGENTS.md being read from anywhere in the tree, skills resolving from three roots). I will not assume the table in the issue is final until I have checked each vendor's docs directly, same reasoning as before, then build the path declaration plus report against whatever the docs actually say, with core.tree_digest and vendored-directory exclusion carried over the same way Copilot does it.
Flagging before I start in case anyone is already on this.
All three surfaces landed in the repository-resident shape this issue asked for, following copilot/ from #68: cursor/, windsurf/ and gemini-cli/, each with an action, a committed baseline under .agentrust/, and both an integrity check and a tests workflow. Which means each one is a pull-request status check with a reviewed baseline, enforceable through branch protection, rather than another capture engine.
@kingztech2019 thanks, and specifically for taking all three as one PR on the grounds that they share a shape. That was the right read of the issue: the work here was path declaration and reporting, and splitting it three ways would have tripled the review for no extra information.
Activity
kingztech2019 commentedon Aug 15, 2026
I'd like to take this, all three surfaces (Cursor, Windsurf, Gemini CLI) as one PR since they share the repository-resident shape #68 already established for Copilot.
Plan, following the same order #68 used: verify each vendor's current path/config documentation first, since that is what actually changed the Copilot design (
AGENTS.mdbeing read from anywhere in the tree, skills resolving from three roots). I will not assume the table in the issue is final until I have checked each vendor's docs directly, same reasoning as before, then build the path declaration plus report against whatever the docs actually say, withcore.tree_digestand vendored-directory exclusion carried over the same way Copilot does it.Flagging before I start in case anyone is already on this.
feat: add agent surfaces for Cursor, Windsurf, Gemini CLI (#121)
imran-siddique commentedon Aug 23, 2026
Delivered in #121, merged 2026-08-19. Closing.
All three surfaces landed in the repository-resident shape this issue asked for, following
copilot/from #68:cursor/,windsurf/andgemini-cli/, each with an action, a committed baseline under.agentrust/, and both an integrity check and a tests workflow. Which means each one is a pull-request status check with a reviewed baseline, enforceable through branch protection, rather than another capture engine.@kingztech2019 thanks, and specifically for taking all three as one PR on the grounds that they share a shape. That was the right read of the issue: the work here was path declaration and reporting, and splitting it three ways would have tripled the review for no extra information.