Cursor & Claude Code: 3x Developer Velocity

← Back to Blog


 ██████╗██╗   ██╗██████╗ ███████╗ ██████╗ ██████╗     ██╗   ██╗███████╗
██╔════╝██║   ██║██╔══██╗██╔════╝██╔═══██╗██╔══██╗    ██║   ██║██╔════╝
██║     ██║   ██║██████╔╝███████╗██║   ██║██████╔╝    ██║   ██║███████╗
██║     ██║   ██║██╔══██╗╚════██║██║   ██║██╔══██╗    ╚██╗ ██╔╝╚════██║
╚██████╗╚██████╔╝██║  ██║███████║╚██████╔╝██║  ██║     ╚████╔╝ ███████║
 ╚═════╝ ╚═════╝ ╚═╝  ╚═╝╚══════╝ ╚═════╝ ╚═╝  ╚═╝      ╚═══╝  ╚══════╝
 ██████╗██╗      █████╗ ██╗   ██╗██████╗ ███████╗
██╔════╝██║     ██╔══██╗██║   ██║██╔══██╗██╔════╝
██║     ██║     ███████║██║   ██║██║  ██║█████╗
██║     ██║     ██╔══██║██║   ██║██║  ██║██╔══╝
╚██████╗███████╗██║  ██║╚██████╔╝██████╔╝███████╗
 ╚═════╝╚══════╝╚═╝  ╚═╝ ╚═════╝ ╚═════╝ ╚══════╝

July 29, 2025

#ai#tools#productivity

3x Developer Velocity

Six months ago, I was skeptical about AI coding assistants. "Another autocomplete that gets in the way," I thought. Today, I can't imagine working without them.

Not because they write perfect code (they don't). But because they've fundamentally changed how fast I can move from idea to working prototype, and from messy prototype to production-ready code.

Here's how Cursor and Claude Code fit into my actual workflow – with real examples.

Cursor: My Prototyping Partner

Cursor is my go-to for building new features and exploring ideas. It's like having a pair programmer who can read your entire codebase and suggest implementations on the fly.

What makes Cursor special:

✓ Codebase-aware autocomplete (it knows your patterns)

✓ Chat interface with full project context

✓ Can edit multiple files at once

✓ Fast inline suggestions while typing

✓ Terminal integration for running commands

Real example: Building a loyalty card PWA

I needed to build LoyaltyLatte – a PWA for coffee shops to manage stamp-based loyalty cards. I had a rough idea but no design yet.

Me: "I want to build a PWA loyalty card system. Users should be able to: - Add a coffee shop by scanning a QR code - See their stamp progress - Get a notification when they earn a free coffee - Work offline What's the best tech stack for this?" Cursor: "For a PWA with offline support and notifications, I'd suggest: - Next.js with App Router for the framework - IndexedDB for offline storage - Web Push API for notifications - QR code scanner library (html5-qrcode) - Service Workers for offline functionality Want me to set up the basic structure?"

Within 30 minutes, I had a working prototype with offline support, QR scanning, and a basic stamp card UI. Not production-ready, but enough to validate the idea and show to potential users.

When I use Cursor:

• Building MVPs and prototypes (0 → 1)

• Adding new features to existing projects

• Exploring unfamiliar libraries or frameworks

• Writing boilerplate (API routes, DB schemas, types)

• Quick UI iterations based on feedback

Claude Code: My Refactoring Co-pilot

Claude Code is my tool for cleanup, refactoring, and systematic improvements. It's methodical, thorough, and great at following a plan across multiple files.

What makes Claude Code special:

✓ Works directly in terminal (no IDE switch needed)

✓ Excellent at multi-file refactors

✓ Creates and follows checklists automatically

✓ Good at understanding project structure

✓ Can run commands and verify changes

Real example: Migrating a Next.js app to App Router

I had a Pages Router app that needed migration to App Router for better performance. 35 pages, shared layouts, and data fetching that needed updating.

Me: "I need to migrate this Next.js app from Pages Router to App Router. Can you create a plan and execute it step by step?" Claude Code creates a checklist: ☐ Audit all pages and identify patterns ☐ Create new app/ directory structure ☐ Convert static pages first ☐ Migrate dynamic routes ☐ Update data fetching (getServerSideProps → fetch in RSC) ☐ Convert shared layouts to layout.tsx ☐ Update imports and routing ☐ Test each page Then it executes methodically, marking items as done, catching edge cases, and asking for clarification when needed.

What would have taken me 2-3 days of tedious work took 4 hours with Claude Code. And because it follows a checklist, nothing got missed.

When I use Claude Code:

• Large-scale refactors (framework migrations, architecture changes)

• Fixing technical debt systematically

• Writing comprehensive tests for existing code

• Setting up infrastructure (Docker, CI/CD, monitoring)

• Cleaning up legacy code with clear requirements

How I Use Them Together

The magic happens when you know which tool to use for which task.

┌────────────────────────────┬─────────────────┬─────────────────┐ │ Task │ Cursor │ Claude Code │ ├────────────────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┤ │ Building new features │ ✅ Primary │ 🟡 Occasional │ │ Prototyping MVPs │ ✅ Primary │ ❌ Not ideal │ │ Multi-file refactors │ 🟡 Can do │ ✅ Excels │ │ Writing tests │ 🟡 Good │ ✅ Better │ │ Exploring new libraries │ ✅ Primary │ 🟡 Decent │ │ Fixing bugs │ ✅ Fast │ ✅ Thorough │ │ Infrastructure setup │ 🟡 Okay │ ✅ Better │ │ Code cleanup │ 🟡 Manual │ ✅ Automated │ └────────────────────────────┴─────────────────┴─────────────────┘

My typical workflow:

1. Prototype (Cursor):

Build the MVP fast. Get something working. Don't worry about perfect code yet.

2. Validate:

Show it to users, get feedback, iterate quickly (still in Cursor).

3. Refactor (Claude Code):

Once the direction is validated, use Claude Code to clean up, add tests, optimize structure, and make it production-ready.

4. Maintain (Both):

Cursor for new features, Claude Code for periodic cleanup and technical debt.

What "3x Velocity" Actually Means

I don't write 3x more code. That would be a nightmare to maintain.

What I mean is:

• I go from idea to working prototype 3x faster

• I can validate 3x more ideas in the same time

• I spend 3x less time on tedious refactors

• I learn new frameworks 3x faster

The bottleneck is no longer typing speed or remembering syntax. It's knowing what to build and having the judgment to ship the right things.

The Limitations (Let's Be Honest)

AI assistants are not magic:

• They can't design your product for you

• They don't understand your users

• They sometimes hallucinate APIs that don't exist

• They can introduce subtle bugs you won't catch immediately

• They struggle with complex architectural decisions

• They don't replace deep domain knowledge

You still need to know how to code. You still need to review everything. You still need to understand what the AI is doing.

But if you use them well, they make you significantly faster at the parts of coding that are mechanical and repetitive – freeing you up to focus on the parts that actually matter: solving real problems for real users.

Bottom Line

Six months ago, I was skeptical. Today, AI assistants are as essential to my workflow as git and VS Code.

Cursor helps me build fast. Claude Code helps me build right. Together, they've made me a better, faster developer – not because they write all my code, but because they remove friction from the parts that were always tedious.

If you're still on the fence, try this: pick one small project. Use Cursor to build it. Use Claude Code to clean it up. See if you're faster.

I bet you will be.

Want to discuss AI tools, workflows, or need help with your MVP?

← Back to Blog Get in Touch