TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Cursor

Score9.4 out of 10

81 Reviews and Ratings

What is Cursor?

Cursor is an IDE and code editor built for programming with AI. Cursor includes an autocomplete that predicts the next edit. Once enabled, it is always on and will suggest edits to code across multiple lines.

Read more details.

Categories & Use Cases

Product Demos

Who Buys & Uses Cursor

Cursor Reviews

What users are saying about Cursor.
View all Cursor reviews

Pros

  • Specialized Plan and Debug Modes save development time
  • Agentic Coding features streamline development workflows
  • Fast code indexing and overall development speed

Cons

  • Difficulty maintaining task context in large codebases
  • Inefficient token management leading to excessive code changes
  • Finicky behavior and limitations of the CLI agent

Cursor - Wonderful IDE which makes every developers work easier

Purna Devi Kiran Kosanam
Software Engineer in Engineering at Edtex (11-50 employees)

Use Cases and Deployment Scope

Almost every developer are using Cursor in our company. Cursor IDE is very powerful which made our developement very fast and easier. We use Cursor to complete our engineering tasks. Composer 2.5 model in Cursor is very well optimized which will take less tokens. We revamped the entire ux of our product using Cursor. It has wonderful capability of getting context and complete the task accurately.

Pros

  • Autocompletion of Cursor is so good which aligns with the existing code and saves lot of time.
  • The understanding of prompt is good
  • Optimizing the tokens when using composer 2.5 feels very helpful
  • Plan mode and debug mode are the two special modes which feels like saving so much of time while developing.

Cons

  • Hallucination is one thing which irritates so much sometimes.
  • When prompt is not good Cursor is getting very bad context which wastes so much of time.
  • Sometimes even after adding Cursor.md file still it not following the guidelines and giving the code which not aligns with the existing code.
  • Sometimes for simple fixes also Cursor is doing so much of code changes which let us loose so much of tokens

Return on Investment

  • Positive - The autocompletion feature so cool which let us to complete our developement fast.
  • Positive - Cursor have very good capability of writing documentation which feels very useful for our internal team
  • Positive - The MCPs are very helpful. I used clickup and figma mcp.
  • Negative - The IDE is very heavy which made our systems slow sometimes

Usability

Alternatives Considered

OpenAI Codex, Claude Code and GitHub Copilot

Other Software Used

Claude Code, OpenAI Codex, Outlier AI

Best Agentic IDE

Incentivized
Gregory Johnston Jr.View profile
Manager, Engineering Systems in Engineering at Origami Risk (1001-5000 employees)

Use Cases and Deployment Scope

We adopted Cursor as a drop-in replacement for VSCode+GitHub Copilot. It's agent integration with code is far superior to VSCode or especially Visual Studio Professional. We have used Cursor to build skills to review PRs, create components, analyze our bug backlog to spot similar bugs or patterns or areas of tech debt, to interrogate Figma or Jira/Azure DevOps tickets for dev-readiness, to spin up AWS infrastructure, to evaluate logs, and so much more. Cursor is your best AI companion for software engineering.

Pros

  • Agentic coding
  • Code review
  • PRD generation
  • Ticket quality evaluation
  • Backlog analysis
  • Test coverage

Cons

  • Pricing

Return on Investment

  • Faster feature development
  • Lower SLAs for defects
  • Higher coding days
  • Lower churn

Usability

Alternatives Considered

Microsoft Visual Studio, Microsoft Visual Studio Code, Claude Code and Replit

Other Software Used

Anthropic Claude, Figma, Replit

Worth the hype.

Incentivized
Krisnananda MahapatraView profile
Software Engineer in Information Technology at Tatvacare (51-200 employees)

Use Cases and Deployment Scope

I use Cursor for coding, system design, and api creation and optimization. I'm a full-stack developer, so I use it daily, and it can do 90% of my tasks correctly. The Composer model was good at launch, but now it doesn't meet my expectations. There is a new Grok model; they are all cursor-trained, optimized models, but they do a lousy job for the frontend. They can integrate APIs properly with the right prompt and enough context, but for the frontend, they lack the skills to enhance or fix the UI. I have to be very specific about frontend tasks, and it still can't create a new design or anything. It gets the job done, but for frontend tasks it's not that good. Overall, I'm satisfied, but it could be better.

Pros

  • API creation.
  • Integrations
  • Plan mode for large tasks.
  • Refactoring.

Cons

  • Frontend skill.
  • UI enhancement.
  • New UI ux designs and best practices.
  • It should have frontend skills like Claude.

Return on Investment

  • It's fast.
  • It's precise.
  • It gets the job done most of the cases in a single prompt.

Usability

Alternatives Considered

Claude Code, Google Antigravity, Devin, Ollama and Code-X

Other Software Used

Claude Code, Anthropic Claude, Google Antigravity, Devin

Cursor is the only IDE you need for daily driver

Incentivized
Abhishek Sharma
Sonftware Developer in Engineering at Conceptualize (11-50 employees)

Use Cases and Deployment Scope

It has all the required modes in the agentic chat, like Agent, Debug, Plan, Multiagent, etc, which help us use these tools in a single place with a great UI.

Pros

  • Debug: the debug mode is very useful in the Cursor IDE
  • Plan: It plan the task and module very well
  • CLI: this gives the vibes of the claude code, where we have option to select the best models

Cons

  • It lost the context of the task if i try to do some changes on the existing module which is previously written by Cursor on the new chat.

Return on Investment

  • Till now it have positive impact
  • It has Auto mode, which do the job after the expensive modals quote exhaust which is like the most

Usability

Alternatives Considered

Devin

Other Software Used

Claude Code, OpenAI Codex

Finally it took over the competition.

Incentivized
Verified User
C-Level Executive in Information Technology (1-10 employees)

Use Cases and Deployment Scope

I use Cursor as a development platform because it makes using AI very simple. Instead of changing CLIs all the time in order to get the tokens from each company, Cursor allows me to have one place with all the models, API keys, connections, and everything to make the workflow smoother.

Pros

  • LLM API Keys Management.
  • LLM Switch.
  • LLM session.

Cons

  • The Tiers for non corporate user.
  • The token management need improvement.
  • Auto-reduce the message sent in order to save tokens.

Return on Investment

  • Less stress changing CLI.
  • Less stress managing LLM API Keys.
  • More productivity thanks to having it all in one place.

Usability

Alternatives Considered

Microsoft Visual Studio Code, Google Antigravity and Claude Code

Other Software Used

Google Antigravity, Claude Code, OpenAI Codex

Cursor Alternatives

Products similar to Cursor that may also meet your needs.
View all Cursor alternatives
Microsoft Visual Studio Code
CompareLearn more
Anthropic Claude
CompareLearn more