Editor & AI
What this layer solves
You need an environment where you edit code, search the repo, and run agents or multi-file edits with real context. Browser chat alone is not enough for day-to-day shipping.
The tools below are comparable: VS Code–class (or agent-first) IDEs with deep AI integration. None is universally “best” — pick from workflow, stack, budget, and org policy.
Cursor, Windsurf, and Google Antigravity
| Cursor | Windsurf | Google Antigravity | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Origin | Fork of VS Code, AI-native product | VS Code fork (Codeium); “Cascade” agent | Google; agent-first IDE + manager surface |
| Strengths | Huge community, tutorials, and Next.js/TS mindshare; Composer / agent modes; strong tab and repo context | Autonomous agent flows (Cascade), competitive positioning vs peers; familiar editor shell | Tight Gemini integration; agent + browser-in-the-loop story; artifacts / verification focus |
| Tradeoffs | Pricing and limits move; you’re on a vendor roadmap | Less omnipresent in generic “how to code” content than Cursor | Newer surface; workflow differs from classic “just an editor”; Google account / policy constraints |
| Docs | cursor.com/docs | windsurf.com (Codeium) | antigravity.google |
Details change often — verify pricing, models, and terms on each vendor’s site before you commit.
Cursor — pros & cons
Pros: Excellent fit if you want maximum Stack Overflow / YouTube / doc coverage for “AI in the repo”; polished multi-file and agent workflows for typical web stacks.
Cons: Easy to over-rely on defaults; heavy agent use can hit cost or rate limits; not your only option for quality.
Windsurf — pros & cons
Pros: Strong agent-led story (Cascade); often a serious alternative when you want autonomy end-to-end inside an editor-shaped product.
Cons: Ecosystem and third-party “how I work” content may be thinner than Cursor for your exact stack; compare privacy and enterprise terms for your org.
Google Antigravity — pros & cons
Pros: Built for agent-first development with Gemini, cross-surface orchestration, and browser involvement when that matches your product.
Cons: Different mental model from “VS Code + chat”; preview/rollout and org approval may apply; less interchangeable with random VS Code extension workflows.
Lighter-weight alternative
GitHub Copilot in VS Code / JetBrains: excellent for inline completion and smaller refactors — usually less “full-repo agent” than the three above. Fine when you don’t want a second IDE.
How this ties to the rest of Build
Other chapters (Next.js, Tailwind, Supabase, Vercel) assume you can open a repo and run commands in a terminal. Any of Cursor, Windsurf, or Antigravity can fill that role — choose by the comparison above, not by a default star rating.
Getting oriented (any of the three)
- Install from the official site; sign in as required.
- Open your project as a folder — AI needs real file context.
- Learn the product’s names for chat vs composer vs agent (they change).
- Add project rules or README notes so the model respects your stack (Next, Supabase, etc.).
Related
- What can go wrong — permissions and automation in dev tools
- How you know it’s working — signals for AI-assisted development
- Free chat AIs — when you’re not in the repo
Last reviewed: April 2026.