The AI Coding Tool Landscape
The AI-assisted development space has matured significantly. Two tools stand out for professional developers: Cursor (the AI-native IDE) and Claude Code (Anthropic's CLI-based coding agent). Both are powerful, but they serve different workflows.
Let's break down where each tool shines.
Cursor: The AI-Native IDE
Cursor builds on VS Code's foundation, adding AI capabilities directly into the editor experience.
Strengths
- Visual workflow — See AI suggestions inline, accept or reject changes with a click
- Tab completion — Predictive code completion that feels natural
- Multi-file editing — AI understands your entire project context through the IDE
- Low barrier to entry — Familiar VS Code interface, easy to adopt
Best For
Cursor excels when you want AI assistance woven into a traditional IDE workflow. It's great for visual learners who prefer seeing changes before applying them.
Claude Code: The Terminal-Native Agent
Claude Code takes a fundamentally different approach — it's a CLI tool that acts as an autonomous coding agent.
Strengths
- Agentic workflow — Give it a task, and it plans, implements, and tests autonomously
- Deep context — 200K token context window means it can understand entire codebases
- Git-native — Creates commits, branches, and PRs as part of its workflow
- Composable — Integrates with any editor, any terminal, any CI/CD pipeline
- Extensible — Custom skills, hooks, and MCP server integrations
Best For
Claude Code shines for complex, multi-file tasks. When you need to refactor an authentication system, implement a new feature across multiple files, or debug a tricky issue — the agentic approach saves significant time.
Head-to-Head Comparison
| Feature | Cursor | Claude Code |
|---|---|---|
| Interface | GUI (VS Code fork) | CLI (Terminal) |
| AI Model | Multiple (GPT-4, Claude) | Claude (Opus, Sonnet, Haiku) |
| Context Window | Varies by model | Up to 200K tokens |
| Multi-file Editing | Yes (visual) | Yes (agentic) |
| Git Integration | Basic | Deep (commits, PRs) |
| Extensibility | Extensions | Skills, Hooks, MCP |
| Offline Mode | Partial | No |
| Pricing | $20/mo Pro | Usage-based |
When to Use Which?
Choose Cursor when:
- You prefer visual feedback and inline suggestions
- You're making small, targeted changes
- You want AI assistance without changing your workflow
- You work primarily in a single file at a time
Choose Claude Code when:
- You have complex, multi-step tasks
- You need to work across many files simultaneously
- You want autonomous task execution
- You're comfortable with the terminal
- You need deep integration with Git workflows
Our Experience at Tekton
At Tekton, we use both tools depending on the task. For quick UI tweaks and component styling, Cursor's inline suggestions are invaluable. For implementing new features, running our SPEC-driven development workflow, and managing multi-file refactors, Claude Code's agentic approach is significantly more productive.
The tools aren't mutually exclusive — they complement each other well.
Conclusion
There's no single "best" AI coding tool. The right choice depends on your workflow, the complexity of your tasks, and your comfort level with different interfaces. Try both, and use whichever makes you most productive for the task at hand.
The real win is that developers now have access to AI tools that genuinely accelerate their work. Whether you choose Cursor, Claude Code, or both — the era of AI-assisted development is here, and it's only getting better.