Interactive tool
Which agent fits your work?
- Lean toward Claude CodeA large refactor, repo exploration, commands, and a thread that can continue while you are not looking at the editor.
- Lean toward CursorYou are editing files, you want the diff in the IDE, or the agent should be Cursor’s (app, CLI, or Cloud).
- Use bothCursor on the interface and Claude on the API, or the reverse. doki’s Inbox is the shared list of questions.
| Claude Code | Cursor | |
|---|---|---|
| Shape | Terminal agent | Editor with agents |
| Where you read the diff | Terminal and git | The editor, plus git |
| Sessions | ~/.claude/projects | Local database, CLI, and API |
| Model | Anthropic | Whichever Cursor offers on your plan |
| Several tasks in parallel | Several terminals | Several chats or cloud agents |
| How doki connects | Hooks and background resume | Local database, CLI, or API without opening the app |
Where Claude Code is the better tool
Claude Code is strongest when you hand it an outcome and let it work: “fix the checkout tests”, “extract this module”. It lives in the repo, runs commands, and asks only when the next step is your decision. The editor does not have to be open for it to move.
The cost of that autonomy is the window. Three Claudes are three questions that can sit buried. doki pulls them out of ~/.claude and, with hooks, hears them immediately. More in Claude Code vs doki.
Where Cursor is the better tool
Cursor wins when the change makes sense while you look at the file: a component, a style, a diff you want to accept line by line. The editor’s agent shares the context of what you have open. The CLI and Cursor Cloud cover the case where you do not want to stay inside the window.
doki reads all three surfaces. Through the API you can assign a Cursor agent to your folders and stay in another app. The breakdown is in Cursor vs doki.
Using them together without doing the work twice
A split you see often: Claude implements the logic on one branch and Cursor adjusts the interface on another. So they do not edit the same tree, each gets a worktree, with its own port and .env. When they finish, diff review says whether it is ready, needs a look, or should not be merged.
The weak alternative is switching windows every time one of them asks. Several agents at once describes the Inbox that avoids that context switch. You do not migrate one product’s history into the other.
Price and accounts
These are separate bills. Claude Code uses your Anthropic account. Cursor uses Cursor’s plan. doki, if you add it, is a third subscription and does not include tokens for either of them.
Picking “the cheaper one” as if they were interchangeable goes badly: an editor is not replaced by a terminal, and a terminal does not give you Cursor’s integrated diff. Compare them by the job, and pay for them separately.
Frequently asked questions
Can I drop Cursor and move everything to Claude Code?
You can move agent tasks to Claude. The editor, if you use it to write by hand and read diffs, still earns its place. They are different layers.
Does doki force me to use both?
No. If only one is running, the Inbox shows that one. The other appears the day you open it.
Do they share context?
Not automatically. Each has its own conversation. You decide what to assign to each, and doki keeps both visible.
Which is better in 2026?
It depends on whether the work lives in the terminal or in the editor. For long autonomous tasks, Claude Code. For editing while you see the file, Cursor. For both at once, you need a shared list, which is doki.
