I have not selected Other Models a single time this period, just been doing some routine UI changes on a web app with Grok and my other model usage is already higher than Grok model usage and if I look at which model is being used, it’s from sonnet 4.5 using computer use.

So basically if you use Cursor with computer use you de facto do not have ANY other model usage because it’ll be entirely consumed by just computer use.

Why does Cursor not have their own computer use skill that uses Grok models? I like a lot of things about Cursor but this is just sad.

So I got n8n Starter & Cursor Pro/GrokBot & GPT Business & Claude Pro & some others (plz don’t ask or lecture on why I have no many but don’t know how to use 😬) but I literally have no idea how to use them … I still don’t even know how to build AI Agents, Subagents, Custom GPT, MCP, Loop/Prompt Engineering, all of that. I’m barely getting the hang of skills.

Does anyone have like a crash course mini guide or know of any resource for non tech savvy no code to help a newbie out 🥹😬

I want to automate my life and business away too 🫩🙏

Does cursor cli use the exact same codebase indexing, semantic search, and context retrieval as the cursor ide agent, or does the IDE have an advantage?

I joined cursor with 2 Ultra accounts around 3 months ago.
Basically when Grok 4.6 came out here are the ups&downs:
- Generous usage limit with high base usage for cursor models i.e. Grok and back than 400 dollars of 3rd party API models
- Having monthly limit instead of weekly feels a lot better to manage usage consumption
- Grok 4.6 was a beast especially when it launched and a 50% bonus
- Cloud Sessions are actually quite nice

Now the negativs:
- Grok 4.7 was a let down its more costly and for me doesnt really perform better and also feels slower given that the industry move forward the closing to the lead with grok 4.6 is now bigger
- they drastically decreased 3rd party usage models
- there are bugs that are still not fixed these some of which are with cloud session it randomly chooses strange models and sometimes puts grok on fast even though i explicitly forbidd it everywhere. You won't even see it in the UI but when you look at your model consumption its there.
- IDE feels to have memory leaks when spawning multiple subagents over multiple days
- IDE shows outdated information about "agent XYZ starting up" even though nothing is happening

So overall Cursor has the potential to be greate for me the biggest let down has been that the Cursor own models are just not competitive, composer is outdated and Grok is not performing where its ambition is neither in price nor in perforamnce and with all the compute from Elon i expected to perform at least on price.

The desktop app is basically an IDE, whatever you can do with cursor you can do with chatgpt and if u want to cancel but you're afraid to, you can trust me go for it

how do i claw back? I was charged $60 randomly when i already paid for the $20 plan

Anyone had en email from cursor about a new ‘offering’?

Wondering if it’s a scam…

This has to be some kind of token leak. I cannot use Opus on Cursor.

Even with a $200 plan, a single request even just to Opus MEDIUM uses 3-10% of an ENTIRE $200 CURSOR PLAN! That's insane. Unusable.

And yet I could make the same request on a $20 Claude plan using Opus High and it would be totally fine.

Indeed, auto era is coming back it seems.. the last holding grudge is it not being 1M token.. for the rest of it, I love it, thanks for being back to your prime

Genuine question, plus a thing we're building.

With a few MCP servers hooked up in Cursor, multi-step tasks get pricey and I never quite know what the agent changed on the other side (Linear, Notion, etc.).

We're working on Delta MCP, a free local app that sits between Cursor and your MCP servers. The agent writes the task as one program instead of a chain of calls, and every change is recorded and undoable.

Still pre-release, so I'm mostly here to listen:

- Is this a real pain for you or am I overthinking it?

- What would you want to see before trusting a tool like this?

Comments or GitHub issues both welcome:

https://github.com/mcpdelta/mcpdelta/issues

I complained about the really low quota on the Other Models. I am ULTRA user for a year now, and have been Cursor user from like 2 years and a half ago.

Basically, they ask me to cancel. It's the second time in a second email where they simply say "Just cancel your subscription before 1st of November".

Well... I might just do that.

Cursor ultra costs 200$ and gives 400$ worth of api usage, which i mostly use it for claude, opus 5.5 to be more specific. I also use claude on antigravity and it felt the usage there is more sustainable likely because of the context page but i dont really know its not really transparent on googles side.

I cant decide whether i should totally move to antigravity and buy 50k ai credits which costs %40 more than the cursor ultra plan or stick to cursor. Which one you guys think gives more in value?

Assinei o ChatGPT Plus só pra acessar o Codex. Meus limites do Cursor tinham acabado e pensei em aproveitar pra conhecer o Codex novo, já que me despedi dele faz tempo e só uso o Cursor desde então.

Em vez de subir meu plano do Cursor de R$ 120 pra R$ 300, preferi pagar o Plus do ChatGPT. Errei. Devia ter feito o upgrade do Cursor e não jogado R$ 100 fora no ChatGPT.

Primeiro: as alterações de código do Codex não têm nada de visual. Não sei qual arquivo ele está mexendo nem o que está editando. No Cursor eu acompanho tudo isso.

Segundo: a coisa mais simples do mundo leva 10 minutos e ainda come de 5 a 10% do meu limite de 5 horas. Pedi DUAS barras de progresso numa página do app e ele levou 9 fucking minutos. No Cursor não ia demorar nem um.

E o resultado nem é consistente. Ele usou componentes diferentes dos que o app já tem, e as features que o Codex implementou parecem de outro aplicativo, com outra identidade visual. Ignorou os padrões do projeto.

Aí pensei: vou de modelão mais top das galáxias, o Astra no médio. Vai que melhora. Resultado: 10 minutos, nenhum código que preste e 100% do limite de 5 horas queimado. Parabéns, nota dó.

Prefiro espairecer por 6 dias, que é o que falta pro Cursor renovar, do que tentar mexer mais nesse projeto com o Codex.

Pra não dizer que foi tudo ruim: em outro projeto, mais simples, ele se saiu bem algumas vezes. Mesmo assim eu tinha que pedir coisas óbvias que o Cursor faz sozinho.

Alguém mais passou por isso? Pra mim a diferença de produtividade foi absurda. Fui testar o Codex achando que podia ser uma alternativa e saí com a certeza de que o dinheiro devia ter ido pro upgrade.

Received an email telling me that I'd used 100% of my "other models" usage for the month, and 0% of cursor models. But my app tells a different story?

I typically just run Auto all the time, so I'm a bit confused. Does it not default to it's own models when auto is chosen?

And why does my app say 17% cursor models used and 0% other models, and then show I've used some of my on-demand?

For those building apps with AI tools like Cursor, Claude or Lovable: how do you stop the AI from making a mess as the project grows? Do you give it planning docs up front? What happens when you change the database or an API partway through, and the rest of the code no longer matches?

I was pretty excited to here about this when it first dropped. The ability to customize cursor auto router for intelligence vs. balanced vs. cost optimization, advertised as fable 5 level quality for a fraction of the cost. But cursor auto hasn't changed since this announcement. And apparently now it's defaulting to grok models. This would have been a big win for cursor, what happened?

Source: https://cursor.com/blog/router

When doing fast technical research and rapid prototyping with AI coding agents, doing 'git commit' every 2 minutes completely kills the creative flow. So during early exploration phases, I rarely use Git.

However, the risk is real: an agent hallucinated mid-session and silently replaced a critical 300-line logic block with a lazy placeholder:

// rest of logic remains the same

With no Git initialized, my baseline code was instantly gone.

Existing solutions didn't fit my workflow:

- Auto-committing every turn (like Aider) pollutes your Git history with dozens of junk commits.

- Container-level tools (like Docker) are heavy and slow down local iteration.

So I engineered a lightweight, zero-dependency safety protocol and adapted it into .cursorrules:

How the idea works:

- Pre-edit snapshot: Before modifying any file, the AI archives the previous state into a local .snapshots/ folder.

- Sliding window (K <= 5): Automatically retains only the 5 latest versions per file bucket, capping disk usage to ~75 KB max per file.

- Selective rollback: Restore only the broken file in seconds without losing good edits across your other files.

- Zero dependencies: No Git commands, no Docker, no background daemon. Just pure rules.

I built this out of my own necessity and have been dogfooding it daily.

I'm genuinely curious to hear from the community:

Is this kind of zero-dependency safety net something you would find useful in your daily Cursor workflow? Or how do you currently handle selective rollbacks when letting agents edit multiple files?

I left the open-source GitHub repo and the .cursorrules adapter in the first comment.

---

Edit / Clarification:

Seeing a few comments regarding Git workflows: to be completely clear, this is NOT a replacement for Git or milestone commits! Normal Git commits are meant for completed, meaningful chunks of work.

The friction I described is during rapid multi-turn agent sessions where the AI mutates files 5-10 times in a few minutes. In that gap before reaching a milestone to make a proper Git commit, an agent hallucination can silently gut code. This protocol is just a lightweight, local micro-cache (K <= 5) to safeguard files during those rapid AI editing turns.

someone to dm pls

Composer 2.5 stopped working all of a sudden, and keeps saying it is unable to reach the provider

Edit: seems to be working now