What an AI Code Assistant Comparison Looks Like in Practice
An AI code assistants comparison is an evaluation of multiple automated coding tools on the same real-world project to judge planning, execution, code quality, and developer-like behavior rather than isolated feature lists or marketing claims. In this test, Google Antigravity 2.0, Cursor 3.0, and VS Code’s new AI features all faced the same challenge: build a complex B2B website for Redstone, a diamond manufacturer with more than 30 years of industry experience, from a single prompt. The brief covered everything from a premium hero section and company overview to four Cs education, inventory filters, interactive product cards, process and certification content, testimonials, and a detailed footer. The goal was to see which AI developer tools could behave like a senior engineer: planning the project, creating files, running commands, and refining the result with minimal supervision.
Cursor 3.0: Fast, Structured, But Not Quite Premium
Cursor 3.0, using its default Composer agent, approached the Redstone brief with impressive speed. It moved through the task list quickly and produced a complete, working website, including functioning navigation, responsive inventory filters for shape, carat, color, clarity, and price, plus interactive product cards tied to diamond data. The copywriting showed it understood Redstone as a B2B diamond supplier rather than a generic retail brand, with headings and calls to action that fit a manufacturing context. Where Cursor fell short was visual polish. The layout was clean and the color choices aligned with the prompt, yet the interface never felt like a premium, distinctive brand experience. The hero section in particular was functional but bland, missing the kind of focal point and personality you would expect from a senior front-end developer.
Google Antigravity Coding: More Considered, More Like a Senior Dev
Google Antigravity 2.0 took longer to complete the same Redstone project, but its output felt more considered. Built around an agentic workflow, it could plan the project, make design decisions, and refine the result rather than only ticking off requirements. Its interpretation of the premium diamond manufacturing brief came through strongly in the hero section and overall visual language, which leaned into a black-and-red theme with more deliberate typography and spacing. Antigravity still met the core functional demands—multi-parameter filters, structured sections for the four Cs and manufacturing process, and supporting company content—but it did so with a clearer sense of brand identity. In effect, it behaved more like a senior developer who understands the bigger picture of UX and storytelling, not just a coder sprinting through a checklist of tasks.
VS Code AI Features: Agents View as a New Workflow
VS Code’s answer to Cursor vs Claude Code and Google Antigravity is the new Agents view, a dedicated, agent-first workspace inside the editor. Instead of another cramped Copilot chat sidebar, it opens a separate window where prompts and tasks drive the session. From there, an agent can inspect the project, create or modify multiple files, run terminal commands, test its work, and fix errors, turning VS Code into an active participant rather than a passive editor. The real upgrade is choice: you can use Copilot for lighter work like a simple landing page, then switch to Claude when a complex web app demands deeper reasoning and stronger architectural awareness. According to XDA, this shift “changed the way I interacted with the editor,” because planning, building, prototyping, and debugging all happen through coordinated agents, not scattered commands.
Who Coded Like a Pro—and When to Use Each Tool
Put side by side, the three AI developer tools excel in different parts of the workflow. Cursor feels like a fast, reliable executor for clear specifications: it races through structure and functionality, and its copy can be strong, but design direction may need hands-on refinement. Google Antigravity coding behaved most like a professional developer for the Redstone site, trading some speed for more thoughtful layout and branding decisions. VS Code’s Agents view is less a single assistant and more a flexible control room where you pick the right specialist—Copilot for quick implementations, Claude for complex reasoning—inside a familiar editor. For teams, that means marketing claims matter less than how each tool fits your process: who plans features well, who ships solid code with minimal supervision, and who helps you debug when the app breaks.
