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 — you get access to all the major models (or any model you want to run), a strong proprietary model (Composer 2) that’s efficient and smart, robust hooks system, great MCP support with easy plugin installs, and Plan mode is excellent for complex tasks. The value per dollar is hard to beat.
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.