We split this copilot-instructions.md into the rules it gives an agent

6 rules. About 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

• ≈0

  Common · estimate

  Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

• ≈6

  Distinctive · estimate

  This author's own choices. Worth a look.

• 0

  Very specific

  Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

• Common
• Distinctive
• Very specific

1. Distinctive:

   Prefer reuse, native, standard-library, and project-pattern checks before custom code.

   line 10
2. Distinctive:

   Keep lean guidance advisory and preserve explicit requirements, safety, accessibility, validation, and data-loss safeguards.

   line 11
3. Distinctive:

   Before custom code, check: current need, stdlib, native platform, installed dependencies, project patterns, then minimum custom code.

   line 13
4. Distinctive:

   Prefer deletion, direct code, and fewer files when current requirements allow it.

   line 14
5. Distinctive:

   Do not simplify away security, accessibility, trust-boundary validation, data-loss prevention, explicit requirements, calibration/tuning …

   line 17
6. Distinctive:

   Use implementation notes or lean markers for known ceilings and upgrade triggers.

   line 18

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 3,779 Copilot instructions files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.