I really like the idea of standardizing on AGENT.md, although it's too bad it doesn't really work with the .cursor/rules/ approach of having several rules files that get included based on matching the descriptions or file globs in frontmatter. Then again, I'm not sure if any other agents support an approach like that, and in my experience Cursor isn't entirely predictable about which rules files it ends up including in the context.
I guess having links to supplementary rules files is an option, but I'm not sure which agents (if any) would work well with that.
stillsut · 7m ago
Yeah I suspect some of these providers will become Microsoft in the '90s type bully holdouts on implementing the emerging conventions. But ultimately with CLI interface you have workarounds to all the major providers read in your system guidelines. But in an IDE - e.g. like MS had with VisualStudio - you more lock-in potential for your config files.
Yep, that's a peeve of mine. I've resorted to using AGENT.md, and aliasing Claude, Gemini, etc to a command that calls them with an initial instruction to read that file. But of course they will forget after some time.
The whole agentic coding via CLI experience could be much improved by:
- Making it easy to see what command I last issued, without having to scroll up through reams of output hunting for context
- Making it easy to spin up a proper sandbox to run sessions unattended
- Etc.
Maybe for code generation, what we actually need is a code generator that is itself deterministic but uses AI, instead of AI that does code generation.
thehamkercat · 40m ago
I think most of them provide an option to change the default file, but it'll be really good if they all can switch to AGENT.md by default
At this point, there are more AI coding agents announced every week than Javascript frameworks, but to be honest, I'm here for it.
wilg · 1h ago
Think how many JavaScript frameworks can be vibe coded now!
kylecordes · 1h ago
(This is an exaggeration:)
Sure, you can have your LLM code with any JavaScript framework you want, as long as you don't mind it randomly dropping React code and React-isms in the middle of your app.
throwup238 · 1h ago
It’s not a real JS framework without JSX support and Typescript types that generate page long errors.
fullstackwife · 59m ago
The concept of JS framework which allows you to rapidly develop an app has the same underlying vibe as coding agent
irrationalfab · 42m ago
Ironically, LLMs might make it very hard for new frameworks to gain popularity since they are trained on the popular ones.
stavros · 1h ago
Why would we create a framework to make coding easier when nobody writes code by hand any more?
tayo42 · 1h ago
Make one that's optimal for Ai somehow
irrationalfab · 41m ago
Like convex.dev
phren0logy · 2h ago
Holy moly. I did not see that coming, but it makes sense. I’m enjoying the terminal-based coding agents way more than I ever would have expected. I can keep one spinning in the background while I do #dayjob, and as a bonus I feel like a haX0r.
2025 is the year of the terminal, apparently?
For my prototype purposes, it’s great, and Claude code the most fun I’ve had with tech in a jillion years.
lherron · 1h ago
With all the frontier labs competing in this space now, and them letting you use your consumer subscription through the CLI, I don’t understand how the Cursor products will survive. Why pay an extra $X/mo when I can get this functionality included in the $Y/mo I’m already paying OAI/Anthropic/GOOG?
vineyardmike · 9m ago
I agree that cursor has to take an aggressive and differentiated approach to succeed, but they have the benefit of pushing each lab into a commodity.
I pay for Cursor and ChatGPT. I can imagine I’d pay for Gemini if I used an android. The chat bots (1) won’t keep the subscription competitive with APIs because the cost and usage models are different and (2) most chat bots today are more of a UX competition than model quality. And the only winners are ChatGPT and whatever integrated options the user has by default (Gemini, MSFT Copilot, etc).
impulser_ · 52m ago
Because you can always use the best model. Yesterday is was Claude Opus 4.1, today it's GPT-5. If you just were paying Anthropic you will be stuck with Claude.
lherron · 34m ago
Yeah but I still want a general purpose chatbot subscription also. So I’d have to buy Cursor + something else.
I guess Cursor makes sense for people who only use LLMs for coding.
tsvetkov · 1h ago
Fascinating to see how agents are redefining what IDEs are. This was not really the case in the chat AI era. But as autonomy increases, the traditional IDE UI becomes less important form of interaction.
I think those CLI tools have pretty good chance to create a new dev tools ecosystem. Creating a full featured language plugin (let alone a full IDE) for VSCode or Intellij is not for a faint-hearted, and cross IDE portability is limited. CLI tools + MCP can be a lot simpler, more composable and more portable.
LeoPanthera · 2h ago
That's funny. I was really hoping that Anthropic would make a "Claude GUI".
consumer451 · 1h ago
In one of their Claude Code talks they said it didn’t seem worth it, given their expectation that all IDEs will become obsolete by next year.
kridsdale3 · 22m ago
Xcode pretty much hung up their hat this year, and threw in with Claude.
unsupp0rted · 2h ago
What's the benefit of this compared to the IDE? To be more like Claude Code?
gorjusborg · 1h ago
Flip your thinking around for a second and consider why an IDE is required for an agent that codes for you?
The IDE/editor is for me, the agent doesn't need it. That also means I am not forced to used whatever imperfect forked IDE the agent is implemented against.
worldsayshi · 1h ago
> why an IDE is required for an agent that codes for you
Because the agents aren't yet good enough for a hands off experience. You have to continuously monitor what it does if you want a passable code base.
tsvetkov · 1h ago
Sure, but monitoring, reviewing and steering does not really require modern IDEs in their current form. Also, I'm sure agents can benefit from parts of IDE functionality (navigation, static analysis, integration with build tools, codebase indexing, ...), but they sure don't need the UI. And without UI those parts can become simpler, more composable and more portable (being compatible with multiple agent tools). IMO another way to think about CLI agentic coding tools as of new form of IDEs.
stavros · 1h ago
I don't really need an IDE, but I do need a great code review interface.
Xenoamorphous · 1h ago
As someone who hasn’t used Claude Code yet, can’t you configure it somehow to use a different tool of your liking, or it has to be in the cli?
stavros · 14m ago
I end up using the VCS tooling (lazygit for me), but coding agents really need to be integrated with this review environment. We need an extra step where the agent will group its changes into logical units (database models in one commit, types in another, business logic in another, tests in another), rather than having to review per-file.
Programming has changed from writing code to reviewing/QAing and reprompting, but the tooling hasn't yet caught up with that workflow. We need Gerrit for coding agents, basically.
bangaladore · 1h ago
Many of these companies are realizing that mainline VSCode is a moat of sorts. I and many people I know won't use any of these that require forking VSCode.
With the benefit that you can also pull in people who don't like using VSCode such as people who use Jetbrains or terminal based code editors.
sblawrie · 2h ago
You can spin up the Cursor CLI inside the terminal of your IDE of choice and not be tethered to Claude's models.
zaphirplane · 2h ago
Is there a better agent than the anthropic one
jstummbillig · 2h ago
I am so curious to know. Why is Cursor not just putting whatever this supposedly does better into... Cursor?
anthonypasq · 1h ago
i dont think it actually does anything better than the chat window in the editor. its strictly worse tbh. it just lets you not be tied to a VSCode interface for editing.im sure Jetbrains diehards would very much appreciate this, but honestly i will find it hard to utilize given the fact Cursor's tab auto-complete is so amazing.
jonplackett · 1h ago
To compete with Claude code
jstummbillig · 1h ago
They are competing with Claude Code already. The competition is not over who can built the nicest CLI.
Rhubarrbb · 24m ago
Does it work with local LLMs like through Ollama or llama.cpp?
risho · 1h ago
is there a way to get it to display more information? its stuck not doing anything and i cant tell if that's because it timed out or it is running a script or it is thinking or what is even happening. sometimes it just does things without even giving any feedback at all. i dont know what it is thinking or what it is trying to do and i cant really see the output of the terminal commands it is running. it just pauses every once in a while and asks to run a command.
is there a way to make it more verbose?
joshmlewis · 1h ago
I noticed it was taking awhile on the first large-ish task I gave it. I'm assuming it was just a bit overloaded at the moment.
rtuin · 41m ago
It seems they haven’t implemented MCP client features in Cursor CLI yet
afro88 · 1h ago
Claude Code but can use GPT-5 built in. Not a bad selling point
and access to Cursor's background agent on the web as well, like ChatGPT Codex. So to this point, I'm regret cancelling my Cursor subscription already
cheema33 · 1h ago
My first thought was, "meh, I already have Claude Code". But then I remembered my primary frustration with Claude Code. I need other LLMs to be able to validate Claude Code's assumptions and work. I need to do this in an automated way. Before Cursor CLI, I did not have a way to programmatically ask Cursor do this. It was very manual, very painful. But, now I can create a Claude Code agent that is a "cursor-specialist" that uses cursor cli to do all of that in an automated way.
good8675309 · 1h ago
Interesting, are you saying you would setup a Stop Hook in Claude Code that calls the Cursor CLI to have it validate and prompt Claude Code with further instructions?
thornewolf · 1h ago
They realized that CLI is the much better interface for these kinds of tasks.
jameskraus · 1h ago
I wonder if this will support directly interfacing with OpenAI's APIs vs. going through Cursor's APIs (and billing).
joshmlewis · 1h ago
I would highly doubt it. Even when you BYOK inside of Cursor they still say it's routed through their servers.
macawfish · 1h ago
Hopefully this one is as good as Claude code. None of them that I've tried have come close yet.
daft_pink · 46m ago
Is the pricing any good?
twapi · 2h ago
Claude Code finally has a serious competitor.
asdfologist · 1h ago
Not sure. So far Reddit seems largely negative on Cursor CLI + GPT-5
There are certainly some lessons here that go beyond coding agents (when it comes to shipping products).
asadm · 2h ago
seems pretty basic. I don't see anything unique here. I am happy with my Gemini CLI.
No comments yet
alessandrorubio · 1h ago
Wouldn't be better to just use the Warp AI solution at this point?
buremba · 1h ago
Only if it would work. I think they miss a big opportunity here by (1) not caring about security at all, (2) trying to develop their own model and only make it available in the cloud.
htrp · 1h ago
They are all clones of gemini cli at this point?
hollerith · 1h ago
Since Gemini CLI was released under the Apache license, a clone is easy to make.
https://agent.md [redirect -> https://ampcode.com/AGENT.md] https://agent-rules.org
I guess having links to supplementary rules files is an option, but I'm not sure which agents (if any) would work well with that.
Yesterday, I was writing about a way I found to pass the same guideline documents into Claude, Gemini, and Aider CLI-coders: https://github.com/sutt/agro/blob/master/docs/case-studies/a...
The whole agentic coding via CLI experience could be much improved by:
- Making it easy to see what command I last issued, without having to scroll up through reams of output hunting for context - Making it easy to spin up a proper sandbox to run sessions unattended - Etc.
Maybe for code generation, what we actually need is a code generator that is itself deterministic but uses AI, instead of AI that does code generation.
Till then you can also use symlinks
there are issues opened in some repos for this
- Support "AGENT.md" spec + filename · Issue #4970 · google-gemini/gemini-cli
https://github.com/google-gemini/gemini-cli/issues/4970#issu...
they also suggest using symlinks for now
Why are we purposely creating CLI dialects?
Claude Code likes to add "attribution" in commit messages, which is just pure spam.
Sure, you can have your LLM code with any JavaScript framework you want, as long as you don't mind it randomly dropping React code and React-isms in the middle of your app.
2025 is the year of the terminal, apparently?
For my prototype purposes, it’s great, and Claude code the most fun I’ve had with tech in a jillion years.
I pay for Cursor and ChatGPT. I can imagine I’d pay for Gemini if I used an android. The chat bots (1) won’t keep the subscription competitive with APIs because the cost and usage models are different and (2) most chat bots today are more of a UX competition than model quality. And the only winners are ChatGPT and whatever integrated options the user has by default (Gemini, MSFT Copilot, etc).
I guess Cursor makes sense for people who only use LLMs for coding.
The IDE/editor is for me, the agent doesn't need it. That also means I am not forced to used whatever imperfect forked IDE the agent is implemented against.
Because the agents aren't yet good enough for a hands off experience. You have to continuously monitor what it does if you want a passable code base.
Programming has changed from writing code to reviewing/QAing and reprompting, but the tooling hasn't yet caught up with that workflow. We need Gerrit for coding agents, basically.
With the benefit that you can also pull in people who don't like using VSCode such as people who use Jetbrains or terminal based code editors.
is there a way to make it more verbose?
https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/claude-code/llm-gateway#l...
https://docs.litellm.ai/docs/tutorials/claude_responses_api
https://www.reddit.com/r/cursor/comments/1mk8ks5/discussion_...
No comments yet