请问HN：一个编码客户是否应该默认导入另一个客户的规则？
一个AI编码客户端会自动读取 ~/.codex/AGENTS.md 和 ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md。这些是竞争编码客户端配置目录中的个人指令文件，位于用户选择的项目之外。
它们的完整内容会默认添加到第一次模型请求中，并发送到客户端的服务器。
在启动时，客户端会显示一条简短的通知，说明它正在包含其他客户端的个人规则。它并不会事先征得许可。可以通过命令行选项禁用此行为。
配置指南中提到：“您的机器范围内的用户规则总是会加载。”这要求用户在加载项目指令文件之前信任工作区。机器范围内的文件会自动加载。
我通过在 ~/.codex/AGENTS.md 中放置一个无害的信号指令进行了测试。在默认运行中，客户端遵循了该指令。当禁用外部个人上下文时，它则没有遵循。
这些文件可能包含内部编码标准、基础设施参考、项目细节或某人粘贴后忘记的凭证。
启动通知是否足够披露？在文档中描述这种行为是否等同于同意？您是否会期望一个编码客户端读取另一个供应商的配置目录中的文件，并在第一次请求时发送这些文件？
查看原文
An AI coding client automatically reads ~/.codex/AGENTS.md and ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md. These are personal instruction files inside competing coding clients' configuration directories, outside the project selected by the user.<p>Their complete contents are added to the first model request and sent to the client's servers by default.<p>At startup, the client displays a brief notice saying it is including the other clients' personal rules. It does not ask permission first. A command-line option disables the behavior.<p>The configuration guide says: "Your machine-wide user rules always load." It requires users to trust a workspace before loading project instruction files. The machine-wide files load automatically.<p>I tested this by placing a harmless canary instruction in ~/.codex/AGENTS.md. The client followed it during a default run. It did not follow it when foreign personal context was disabled.<p>These files can contain internal coding standards, infrastructure references, project details, or credentials someone pasted and forgot about.<p>Is the startup notice enough disclosure? Does describing the behavior in the documentation amount to consent? Would you expect one coding client to read files from another vendor's configuration directory and send them with the first request?