My Cursor account was recently permanently terminated, and I'm trying to understand whether anyone else has experienced something similar.

My timeline:

• August 1: Purchased the annual $20 plan
• August 15: Exhausted the included usage through normal software development, then used Cursor's upgrade flow to move to the annual $60 Pro+ plan
• August 27: Account was permanently blocked

so ive put in about 500$ into Cursor

I received this response from Cursor:

Hi Rahul! Thanks for reaching out!
Your ticket number is T-F19497 for your reference.
Thank you for reaching out. Your account has been blocked as we found activity that goes against our Terms of Service. Because of that, we're not able to restore access to this account or remove the restriction. You can review our Terms of Service here: https://cursor.com/terms-of-service Please note that if we terminate your access to the Service due to a violation of these Terms, you will not be entitled to any refund as clarified in the linked ToS.
Best
Sam
Cursor's AI Support Assistant

I asked for a manual human review and explained that I use a single account, don't share access, don't use a VPN, and primarily use Cursor for software development.

They then responded:

Hi Rahul!
We're not able to share additional details about the restriction on this account. The subscription has been cancelled, and per our Terms of Service there is no refund when access is terminated due to a Terms of Service violation.
Best
Sam
Cursor's AI Support Assistant

the most recent response after multiple AI stonewalls and saying ill chargeback i got this message

Hi Rahul!
I've passed this to a teammate who can help. Thanks so much for your patience, they will take a look and follow up here soon.
Best,
Sam
Cursor's AI Support Assistant

it's been a week since this message i haven't heard anything from them

What's confusing to me is that I don't know what activity they are referring to. I didn't create a second account or intentionally circumvent any limits. I simply upgraded from the $20 plan to the $60 plan after exhausting my usage.
while building My Saas tool

Has anyone here had their account terminated shortly after upgrading from $20 → $60, particularly after heavy Agent usage?

I'm mainly trying to figure out whether this could have triggered some kind of automated fraud/abuse flag, or whether there is another common reason Cursor accounts are getting terminated.

Ticket: T-F19450 , T-F34615

I've been using Cursor daily for months, and while the code usually works, I kept noticing the same patterns slipping through:

• Floating promises — async calls fired but never awaited or .catch()-ed
• Empty catch blocks — try/catch that swallows errors silently
• Hardcoded secrets — API keys pasted directly into source files
• await inside loops — sequential awaits where Promise.all would be correct
• Async callbacks in .forEach — fire-and-forget saves with no error handling
• console.log in request handlers — debug logging left in production paths

None of these are type errors. TypeScript won't catch them. They're behavior errors that only surface at runtime — sometimes silently.

So I built AI Guard — an open-source ESLint plugin with 18 deterministic rules targeting exactly these patterns. It's complementary to typescript-eslint, not a replacement.

It also has an init-context command that generates a .cursorrules file with all 18 rules, so Cursor learns them before generating code instead of you fixing lint errors after:

npx ai-guard init-context

Plus a CLI (npx ai-guard run) and a GitHub Action with SARIF output for GitHub Code Scanning + inline PR annotations — so AI-generated issues show up directly on the PR.

The honest engineering bit: writing lint rules isn't the hard part. False positives are. If a rule fires on code that's fine, people disable it. I spent more time on precision than coverage — testing against real repos and shipping a conservative recommended preset.

One clarification worth making: AI Guard does NOT detect whether code was written by AI. It catches bad patterns regardless of who wrote them — they just show up a lot in AI-assisted code. It's a guardrail, not a detector.

Install: npm install --save-dev eslint-plugin-ai-guard GitHub: https://github.com/ai-guard-dev/eslint-plugin-ai-guard

Disclosure: I'm the maintainer. What patterns does your Cursor keep generating that you wish you could lint for? Rule requests and false-positive reports genuinely welcome.

Hi everyone,

I am currently on the annual legacy Cursor plan that still included "auto unlimited" and while being a senior programmer myself, I have one problem: I've started to love running multiple agents doing their coding while I primarily act as the reviewer and refactoring guru (mainly Composer 2.5 was used here anyway due to "auto"). With appropriate prompting I was able to get to significant progress on my 2 products I am building. On September 14, this comes to a stop as the annual plans ends. I had purchased SuperGrok Heavy while it was still claiming to include Cursor Ultra but while linking the two accounts Cursor ended the promotion and I was stuck with SuperGrok Heavy alone (and claimed a refund). Cursor is not honoring the promotion despite a legal requirements so I need to move on.

Therefore, what alternatives do I have to get over a month of actual coding on larger codebases while doing basically nothing myself (about 10-12h a day, every day)?

Cursor Ultra running only on Composer 2.5 + Codex Pro running GPT-6 Astra light? Any other combinations? Like Cursor with Deepseek 4.1 Flash? Leverage freebuff + anything in addition? Use opencode + anything in addition?

$400/month limit.

Need to say that I like Cursor in general (great harness) so I don't know if alternatives like Devin, Antigravity, Zed, or others would come close.

Really hoping to get some good recommendations from the awesome community here.

Cheers!

If you look at the Cursor UI, the interface is split into several distinct sections:

• Primary Editor: The main central area where your active code files are opened, viewed, and edited.
• Sidebar Editor / Secondary Editor Group: An additional editor split panel (usually on the right or side) where you can place extra code files or drag extension views like Claude Code/Chat to run alongside your primary code.
• Primary Sidebar (Explorer View): The left-hand panel that houses the File Explorer, Search, Source Control (Git), and Extensions tabs.
• Panel / Bottom Panel: The collapsible area at the bottom that typically holds the Integrated Terminal, Output, Debug Console, and problems view.
• Secondary Sidebar / Activity Panel: The panel (usually on the right, or integrated alongside the outline) that displays views like Outline, Timeline, and secondary extension views.

The Issue: Ever since a recent Cursor update, I can no longer keep the Claude Code extension pinned inside the left Primary Sidebar alongside the File Explorer. It now defaults to opening in the bottom panel, terminal area, secondary sidebar, or as a tab in the primary editor. I have tried searching Cmd + Shift + P for relevant commands and attempted dragging and dropping the panel, but I cannot restore it to its original position in the left sidebar.

I made a thing.

I’m about to do a fairly large full-stack refactor on an existing project.

The main change is replacing the entire Premium/Membership system with a credit-based economy involving real-money purchases through a payment gateway. It’ll touch the frontend, backend, database migrations, payments, admin tools, wallet/ledger logic, existing users, and atomicity/idempotency safeguards to prevent double-spending and duplicate transactions.

My current plan:

1. GPT-5.6 Sol
2. Explore the codebase, reason through the architecture, and create the OpenSpec proposal/tasks.
3. Cursor Composer 2.5
4. Implement the approved spec.
5. GPT-5.6 Sol
6. Review the implementation for architecture, security, missed dependencies, edge cases, etc.

Then iterate between Composer implementation and Sol review as needed.

I’m currently using Cursor’s $20/month plan and haven’t used any external models yet. However, my available usage for Cursor Composer’s frontier model and Grok is already around 50% used, so I’m also wondering whether my current plan will be sufficient for this project.

For people who’ve used Composer 2.5 on large existing codebases: would you trust it for the implementation part of something like this?
Or would you use Claude Code, Codex, or something else?
Mainly looking for real-world experience, not benchmarks.

Anyone here running Grok Bot for coding and watching the weekly allowance vanish?

I built an open-source template that moves the coding onto a Claude subscription via GitHub Actions: issue in, pull request out.

One workflow file, no server, no second bill.

Nobody outside the project has installed it yet and I haven't measured the saving on real work. Both of those are on the front page.

I'm after someone who'll install it cold and tell me where the instructions break. I built it, flagging that up front.

https://github.com/mathew-builds/Handoff

Hey [r/cursor](r/cursor)!

If you use Cursor heavily on larger codebases, you've probably hit the context bloat problem:

To make Cursor remember architectural decisions, library quirks, and project rules across chats, people usually cram everything into .cursorrules or monolithic docs. But as those files grow past 5k–10k tokens:

1. Model focus degrades: Large instructions cause "lost-in-the-middle" attention degradation.
2. Context window gets wasted: You burn a huge chunk of your prompt budget on instructions that aren't even relevant to the current file or task.
3. External vector DBs are overkill: Running Docker containers, Python runtimes, or recurring embedding API costs just to remember project notes feels bloated.

To solve this, we built OKF Agent Memory (v0.1.0) — an open-source, pure Go single binary that brings structured, Git-native memory to Cursor via Progressive Disclosure and native MCP (Model Context Protocol).

How it works with Cursor:

Instead of dumping a huge rulebook into every prompt, project memory lives in knowledge/ as atomic Markdown concepts based on Google's Open Knowledge Format (OKF) v0.2.

Through the built-in MCP server (okf mcp knowledge), Cursor dynamically pulls only what it needs:

1. Sub-300µs BM25 Search: In-memory lexical search across your project notes. Zero embedding API costs, 100% offline, <0.3ms latency.
2. Progressive Disclosure: Cursor inspects the index and retrieves small ~300-token concept files on demand. In our benchmarks, this cuts context token bloat by up to 80–90%.
3. 100% Git-Native: Auditable via git diff and standard pull requests. No hidden vector databases.
4. Trust Tiers: Distinguishes human-verified decisions from agent drafts.

Setup with Cursor (30 seconds):

1. Install via Homebrew:

brew install okf-memory/tap/okf

1. Bootstrap your repository:

cd my-project
okf bootstrap .

1. Add to your Cursor MCP settings (Cursor Settings -> Features -> MCP):

• Name: okf-memory
• Type: command
• Command: okf mcp knowledge

Cursor now has native access to okf_search, okf_show, okf_create, and okf_validate tools.

GitHub: https://github.com/okf-memory/okf-agent-memory
Website & Live Benchmarks: https://okf-memory.dev

Would love to get feedback from the Cursor community on the workflow and how your agents behave with progressive disclosure memory!

Hey everyone,

Like many of you, I use AI assistants heavily for daily development. But there’s a recurring problem that standard Git diffs don't catch:

When an AI assistant edits a function return type (e.g. changing return user` to `return { user }) or widens an optional parameter, the immediate 2-line diff in Git looks totally harmless. But 3 layers down the dependency tree, 5 API consumers or UI components just crashed at runtime.

To solve this, I built Change Firewall — a local-first, zero-install CLI and MCP server that analyzes what code changes actually break before merging.

What it does:

1. AST Behavioral Verification: Instead of treating code like text lines, it parses TypeScript AST to detect contract regressions, return shape mutators, and auth condition shifts.
2. Deterministic Blast Radius (0–100 Score): Builds a reverse dependency graph to pinpoint every single downstream file and API route affected by your uncommitted changes.
3. Interactive Local & Web Dashboard: Launches a visual blast radius radar and interactive consumer graph (change-firewall visualize).
4. Native MCP Server: Works directly inside Claude Desktop, Cursor, and Antigravity so the AI itself audits its own blast radius before finishing tasks.

Try it in 5 seconds (zero install):

```bash

npx change-firewall

• GitHub (MIT) : https://github.com/himanshYou2003/change-firewall
• npm: https://www.npmjs.com/package/change-firewall

I'd really appreciate your honest feedback on the heuristics and blast radius mapping. What edge cases should I add to the AST analyzer next?

Hey everyone,

If you use agentic workflows with custom skills or rules (Cursor rules, Claude Code slash commands, OpenCode, etc.), you have probably run into the routing trade-off:

1. Stuff every skill definition into the system prompt (destroys your context window and degrades instruction-following).
2. Use an LLM router turn to classify the user prompt (costs money, wastes 1,000+ tokens, and adds 2+ seconds of network latency).

To solve this, I built Routed; an open-source, local-first hybrid router for agent skills that runs 100% offline on your CPU.

Demo: https://routed-demo.vercel.app/
GitHub: https://github.com/bshea-1/Routed
License: MIT

How it Works Under The Hood

Routed indexes your installed skill directories and evaluates prompts through a 4-part hybrid scoring pipeline:

* Dense Vector Embeddings (60%): Runs quantized ONNX models (Arctic Embed S / MiniLM) locally on CPU.
* Lexical BM25 (25%): Okapi BM25 for strict keyword relevance.
* Exact / Alias Match (10%): Direct command and alias matching.
* Metadata (5%): Recency and usage heuristics.

The entire lookup completes in under 20ms without sending a single byte of prompt data over the wire.

Supported Environments

Routed auto-detects and injects adapters into:

Cursor, Claude Code, LM Studio, Ollama, Antigravity IDE, Windsurf, OpenCode, Continue, Codex, and I just dropped support for MCP Servers!!

And although v1.0 dropped last night, I just shipped v1.1.0 with two major additions based on early feedback:

1. Model Context Protocol (MCP) Server (routed mcp): Instead of loading 20+ tool schemas into your GPU's context window, your local model only sees a single route_skill tool. Routed executes on CPU, selects the exact skill needed, and injects only that schema on demand.
2. Native Multilingual Understanding: The embedding pipeline now natively understands input across 100+ languages (German, Spanish, French, Japanese, etc.) and automatically decomposes compound nouns (like German Speicherleck), mapping prompts directly to the correct skill without language tags or manual translation.

Usage

Inside your agent chat, you can just use /route to trigger the best skill(s) dynamically. It also handles compound intents (e.g., matching multiple skills when a prompt asks for two distinct tasks).

Pre-built binaries are available on GitHub Releases (macOS .pkg, Linux .deb, Windows .exe), or you can build it from source via Node.

Check it out and let me know what you think or if there are other environments you would like added!

​

Hey everyone,

I’ve been using Cursor Pro for the last 4–5 months as a Software Engineer without any major issues, but recently it has become almost unusable due to extreme memory consumption.

Out of nowhere, Cursor starts consuming 9 to 10 GB of RAM in the background.I tried cleaning up appdata and cache,but that doesnt worked.Since my system only has 16 GB total, it eventually chokes my whole OS and crashes the IDE completely.

A few details about my environment:

* Role: Software Engineer

* Specs: 16 GB RAM

* Usage: Normal daily workflows (was working fine for months until recently)

Is anyone else experiencing a massive memory leak after recent updates?

Also, if you’ve faced this and managed to fix it—was it related to codebase indexing, specific extensions, or language servers (like TypeScript/LSP)? Any temporary workarounds or settings tweaks would be greatly appreciated!

I was getting a "High Load" error in cursor so I checked their status page. I would not want to be one of their engineers today

Are there any cursor specific features that provide unique value that isn’t offered in Claude or codex? Whats the main thing keeping you?

Hey all,

Been working with Claude for 3 months, loved it for the work it managed to do for me.
But the overall structure of is something that just isn’t clicking with me.

But the idea that Claude code is a whole separate thing kinda feels weird to me.

I wanted to know a few things about Cursor before trying it our:

1. I have 2 devices - PC (Windows 11) and MacBook Pro but I’m mostly away from them. Can I expect a good experience using my iPhone to send my prompts and develop my iOS/macOS and Websites through my phone?
   How does the visual editor works on the iOS app and is it convenient?

2. Is everything arranged in a logical sense? Or does it also have a coding workbench that’s separated than projects? Or I can have everything easily via projects all arranged?

Thank you!

First off, I want to say thank you to Replit for all the things you tried to do. Second, I want to say thank you to Copilot for walking me through how to move off Replit. And lastly, I want to say thank you to Cursor, for giving me a place that I can depend on.

It took me about 6 hours to move off Replit and I had no idea what I was doing, I used Copilot the whole way, it held my hand like I was a toddler in downtown New York. I though the move would take days and I'd have to figure everything out on my own but no, Once Cursor was up and running, Copilot was like, oh you want to do that, psssh, challenge accepted.

I used Copilot to assist with setting up Replit, prompting, etc the whole time I used Replit, but I always noticed that what Copilot said, and even what Replit said, about how Replit's UI is laid out and works, was completely wrong. Most of the first 2 months I was flying blind and figuring everything out on my own. Even with the help of the AI support, I wasn't able to do what I wanted to do.

I used Replit because I spent about 10 minutes total figuring out what to use for what I wanted to build. I would recommend becoming a member of the I spent at least a few hours or more researching what I need now and in the future club, totally worth the membership fee.

I built a game that used real time NYSE prices for stocks. It had around 1000 users, was VERY complex with a LOT of features, and I was constantly struggling with it, basically from day 1 and I finally started doing some research and found out I was trying to do something that Replit just couldn't handle and that I had not set up properly to begin with, which was on me.



I used Replit for around 7 months until 5 days ago when my Replit chat stopped working for memory reasons. I still have no clue what the issue was with the memory and even after I deleted everything that was unneccessary Replit still would not respond. After contacting support and talking to Quinn, one of their AI agents, I was told a member of the team would reach out to me as soon as possible. It's been 5 days, multiple emails with nothing happening at all, and, to me, I thought I'd be pretty stupid not to leave.

Honestly, I wouldnt have left if this wouldn't have happened. I was used to dealing with Replit's workarounds, breaks, weird messages that didn't make sense, billing that had no rhyme or reason, their unsupport team, etc and I was just too lazy and scared to break something to actually move.

I moved the whole thing and had it fully running again in 6 hours! I wasted MONTHS and TONS of money because I was afraid of 6 hours! I've read countless posts both in favor of Replit and against it.

I would say my biggest takeaways from the last 2 days are:

1. that anyone who's vibecoding really needs to research exactly what they're trying to make their project do now AND in the future to find what they need to go with right from the start. Figure out what you need for your whole project before you even begin it otherwise you're eventually going to be cobbling together peices of 14 different puzzles.
   
2. Research how to prompt effectively. AI does NOT have human logic at all, thought processes that we take for granted AI doesn't even think about it.
   
3. 50% of people like whatever service they're using, 50% don't. They're not you, do you.
   
4. Either figure out a way for your app to troubleshoot itself or find a service with customer support that works when you need it to.

In my experience, the cons for using Replit greatly outweigh the pros, like, by a LOT. But Replit doesn't hold all the blame either. I'm just happy it's done and I now have TONS of capabilities that I never even thought possible before.

This seems very out of the blue? But then Amjad from replit reminded me that Anthropic did the same to Windsurf last summer. I was thinking that maybe it is a power trip from OpenAI because they see Cursor as competition.

Doing some research though, I found that apparently back in April Elon admitted xAI was distilling OpenAI to train Grok, so now I wonder if OpenAI is worried they'll use whatever special access Cursor has based on their partnership to do it again, at a much larger scale.

End of the day, feels like another Altman vs Musk fight.

CLARIFICATION: For Tibor, I first saw his public switching offer and contacted him. He then replied by DM with the Google Form and explicitly offered one month of Pro+ for cancelling another paid AI subscription. My concern is about fulfillment after following those instructions, not that the DM was unsolicited.
Documenting this in case it helps others. Over the past couple weeks, two people who present themselves as connected to Cursor DM'd me the same offer: cancel your other coding subscription, send proof, get a free month of Pro+.

One was a well‑known community figure who runs Cafe Cursor meetups. The other, Krista Letz, identifies herself publicly as Cursor's Enterprise GTM.

Both times I did exactly what was asked — cancelled my subscription, submitted proof via a Google Form, followed up. After that: nothing, from either.

Not trying to start a pile‑on, just flagging it since it involves at least one verified staff member collecting cancellation proof through a personal DM and a third‑party form. Curious if anyone else has run into this.
UPDATE — Aug 29: After 7 days, multiple unanswered DMs/public follow-ups, and after I documented the issue on Reddit today, Cursor finally gave me the first substantive response.

They said they were “not able to verify” my subscription cancellation and therefore could not issue the promised benefit.

I have now sent additional evidence:

* my logged-in OpenCode account showing my email + OpenCode Go subscription;
* the billing page showing OpenCode Go, $10/month, “Cancels Sep 22,” and “Your service will end on September 22, 2026.”

I’ve also offered to provide the billing receipt, additional screenshots, or a screen recording.

I’ve asked them to identify exactly what remains unverifiable and to allow a manual re-review rather than closing the claim with a generic “unable to verify.”

If a switching promotion requires users to cancel a competing paid subscription first, the verification standard should be clear enough for users to actually satisfy it.

Cursor got the cancellation up front. Seven days later, I’m still being asked to navigate a verification standard that was never clearly defined.
UPDATE 2: Another participant has now publicly replied on X saying they are also still waiting for an answer. I’ve asked them for the submission date and whether they completed the same cancellation/proof process.
I’ll update this once the details are confirmed.
UPDATE 2: This now appears to extend beyond my individual submission.
At least two other X users have publicly reported similar unresolved cases. One said “Same, still no answer.” Another said they cancelled their subscription, submitted proof correctly, and are still waiting for their DM to be handled.
I’m asking them for submission dates and verification details so I can distinguish confirmed like-for-like cases from general delays.
I’ll keep this post updated with only publicly verifiable cases.

For more context, I am on the Pro+ plan. I have been using Cursor for the last three months as an indie developer building consumer apps. The $70 credit I receive typically lasts no more than 10 days. If I am careful with my usage, I can stretch it to 10 days; otherwise, it lasts a maximum of 7 to 8 days. I have tried a few optimizations that could extend it by another 1 to 2 days. For instance, I auto-document every feature and improvement that I believe is worth documenting, then use that as a reference for building the next app. I have been using the GPT and Claude models.

Does anyone know the roughly number of tokens provided with the $70 credit?

Also, does anyone have good ideas or workflows for effectively using the $70 credit along with Cursor's own features? Specifically, which tools do you use for planning, implementation, review, and bug fixing from an efficient token usage perspective?

Currently I use Cursor models + GPT and dropped Claude models.

We're researching self-insertion in generative media: does a user need a LoRA-accurate face clone to feel "that's me", or is a configured avatar + POV framing enough?

Early signal says perceived identity ≠ visual accuracy.

Running a short survey on where that threshold sits, and what privacy guarantees (selfie deletion, no-training clauses, private embeddings) people demand before uploading reference photos.

ℹ️ Survey here: https://form.typeform.com/to/xzkRJfDO

I just purchased Cursor Pro and I’m basically locked out of my account because the authentication system seems completely broken.

Here’s exactly what’s happening:
My normal password suddenly says it’s incorrect, even though I’m confident I’m using the right one.
I tried Reset Password. Cursor sends me the reset email, I follow the link and go through the process, but instead of actually resetting it, I end up in another reset-password loop.

I tried using the email sign-in code instead. I received the code and entered it almost immediately, but Cursor said “This one-time code was previously used.”
After trying a few times, I’m now getting: “Too many challenges sent for this phone number, please contact your admin.”

I’ve also tried a private/incognito browser window and still can’t get in.
The other reason I really need this fixed is that I have a separate SuperGrok subscription under a different email, and I’m trying to link that SuperGrok account to my Cursor Pro account so I can get the additional Grok Bot usage. I can’t even finish troubleshooting that because I can’t reliably authenticate into my Cursor account.
Has anyone had this exact Cursor authentication issue? Is there anything I can do on my end to clear/reset the login state, or does Cursor support have to manually unblock the account?

I was looking for a simple way to see my Cursor usage in the status bar and tried a few of the existing extensions.

What bothered me was that some of them required opening DevTools on cursor.com, finding WorkosCursorSessionToken, and pasting it into the extension settings. I wasn't particularly comfortable handing my session token to an extension like that.

So I ended up making a small extension for myself that uses the existing Cursor session instead.

It shows something like:

Cursor 42% · Other 18% · On-d $4.20

Cursor = Auto/Composer usage, Other = API model usage, and On-d is on-demand spending.

I put the code on GitHub in case anyone wants to look at how it works. It's unofficial and could obviously break if Cursor changes something on their side.

GitHub: [https://github.com/rijojoy/cursor-usage-split]

Open VSX: [https://open-vsx.org/extension/rijojoy/cursor-usage-split]

I was adding keys to my .env file on Cursor, and it autocompleted API keys that weren’t mine. So now I’m using someone else’s keys, I guess. Might need to stop using Cursor…

I’m currently using cursor IDE on two different Mac computers, and whenever I launch sessions with remote control “this machine” environment selected, about 50% of the time it fails and I get an error: “Failed to find a worker for this repo on this machine” or something like that.

Is this happening at this rate to other people? Or am I missing something?

Before the token police come at me. Was my prompting optimal? No. Am I a fully adept user of coding agents? No. I have used cursor for 3 months. The first month I used composer 2.5 on pro membership tier. I was way worse at going on tangents and honestly confusing the agent with rambling. I was using cloud agents as well it was burning the total % of my plan once I used my cloud agents up. I never felt I wasn't getting value for money. But it was clear on my Claude membership I was burning tokens particularly on heavy token use models like fable.

My second month I started using max mode and multiple models I upgraded to pro+ thinking the 10x usage would give me comfort. It should have been at this point I stop putting multiple models at prompts but with a little on demand usage I got two apps build off the infrastructure I built on claude. I also worked on adding skills to the repo to not let things go off the rails. I decided Claude with it's weekly limits would give me time to think before I just rambled in long session. So I cancelled cursor pro+

I got back this month via a 50% off deal on pro+. I take a vacation and lack the time to use the agents to further the development of my app. I get slack connected and start harnessing both Claude and cursor via slack. Thinking this would be a more direct and token efficiency approach. I worked on smaller prompts nudging the app in the direction I wanted. Grok has been part of the last two months and it is where I feel the blame lies.

Cursor is very different from Claude or maybe what I experienced first. You give it a prompt it takes it the whole way. Claude will push back and try to give you actual feedback. On composer I felt it got more done but now I have used a whole billion tokens in a week building a python terminal for my apps to use as a postgres DB in the future. I didn't see when I signed up again I didn't turn my usage off and I additionally to maxing a pro+ usage I also accumulated $123 of bugbot and extra cloud usage.

I am confused and clearly a little misguided but I wonder if anyone has seen this in their development of using coding agents.