Tooling: Cursor rule cleanup

[tbradsha]

The Cursor rules appear to have recursion issues when attempting to reference another file (e.g. jetpack/jetpack/jetpack/jetpack/jetpack/.github/versions.sh is nonsense). This fixes those links and clarifies a few other items (e.g. coding standards are not identical to WP coding standards).

Cursor's documentation has the following:

Use @file in your project rules to include them as context when the rule is applied.

I've updated references to monorepo files to use the @path/to/file syntax; hopefully that's what it means. It doesn't seem Cursor has awareness of its own rules in the limited time I tried to ask it questions.

Other information:

• Have you written new tests for your changes, if applicable?
• Have you checked the E2E test CI results, and verified that your changes do not break them?
• Have you tested your changes on WordPress.com, if applicable (if so, you'll see a generated comment below with a script to run)?

Jetpack product discussion

Does this pull request change what data or activity we track or use?

Testing instructions:

Do the changes make sense?

[github-actions]

Thank you for your PR!

When contributing to Jetpack, we have a few suggestions that can help us test and review your patch:

• ✅ Include a description of your PR changes.
  
• ✅ Add a "[Status]" label (In Progress, Needs Team Review, ...).
  
• ✅ Add a "[Type]" label (Bug, Enhancement, Janitorial, Task).
  
• ✅ Add testing instructions.
  
• ✅ Specify whether this PR includes any changes to data or privacy.
  
• ✅ Add changelog entries to affected projects
  

This comment will be updated as you work on your PR and make changes. If you think that some of those checks are not needed for your PR, please explain why you think so. Thanks for cooperation 🤖

---

The e2e test report can be found here. Please note that it can take a few minutes after the e2e tests checks are complete for the report to be available.

---

Follow this PR Review Process:

1. Ensure all required checks appearing at the bottom of this PR are passing.
2. Choose a review path based on your changes:
   • A. Team Review: add the "[Status] Needs Team Review" label
     • For most changes, including minor cross-team impacts.
     • Example: Updating a team-specific component or a small change to a shared library.
   • B. Crew Review: add the "[Status] Needs Review" label
     • For significant changes to core functionality.
     • Example: Major updates to a shared library or complex features.
   • C. Both: Start with Team, then request Crew
     • For complex changes or when you need extra confidence.
     • Example: Refactor affecting multiple systems.
3. Get at least one approval before merging.

Still unsure? Reach out in #jetpack-developers for guidance!

[jeherve]

That doesn't seem to work for me. Cursor seems to want that markdown link with that special mdc: format. It doesn't recognize the link otherwise.

I'm not sure where that mulitple jetpack comes from though ; when I create the link today I only get one jetpack.

[kraftbj]

hopefully that's what it means. It doesn't seem Cursor has awareness of its own rules in the limited time I tried to ask it questions.

Cursor Rules seem like they're implemented oddly. You have to tell the agent to follow the rules for it to follow the rules by specifically bringing a rule into context. It sounds like they see the system as library where you can "check out" the rules that are needed and ignore the rest.

Makes it a lot less useful than I was hoping, but alas.