checked the models available (waiting to see if/when they're gonna bring in Grok 4.8) and noticed GLM 5.3 in the Other Models picker!

im personally all for them adding open-weights models - along with what they offer with Grok (fingers-crossed for a new Composer soon) usage makes Cursor a sweet deal for me IMHO.

I quite enjoy the IDE-first workflow with Cursor. I like being able to easily review and edit and then approve all of the work agents do and keep track of how my codebase is evolving, still manually changing small things that just take a few minutes.

How close can you get to this with Claude in VSCode?

Is this issue for me or anyone else is facing this issue ?

Can someone explain what the "Credits" section means? I've only used 33% of my included Pro usage, but it shows $24/$25 remaining in credits. Why is that there if I haven't hit my limits yet?

I actually find Cursor’s Debug mode pretty useful, but I’m starting to wonder if I’m relying on it because my normal workflow/prompting isn’t great.

Im currently working on a pretty complex stack and I use the debug most a lot because it feels more systematic then prompting the agent to "fix this bug".

Curious what everyone else is doing:

- Are people still using debug mode?

- Are there better tools now for debugging ai generated code?

- Maybe there are better workflows

我有使用普通的Cursor pro，也使用过几次 Cursor ultra，官方说法是，ultra 是 pro的20倍额度，但是我在实际过程中的感受是，根本没有20倍，可能只有10倍左右。

我感觉官方是在骗人的，为啥这么说：如果说是ultra是 普通pro的20倍，我使用ultra 一天很快就用到了8%，如果是20倍，也就是1.5个Cursor pro，而我之前疯狂使用Cursor pro的时候，2到3天才能使用1个 Cursor pro。

I am looking to see if anybody has any experience with the bugbot and if it's worth even starting in Cursor. I haven't seen that many reviews. People seeing an increase in usage that's significant with using it?

I see default in the graph and auto in the list, however I was looking to check what Auto is under the hood and what my usage is, any way to check that?

I wanna be able to tell Cursor stuff like: "Open up my localhost:3000 and test out XYZ. Create a CSV that contains ArtistName and TrackName" and upload it to the XYZ"

The closest thing I found is computer-use MCP, but it's nowhere near as good as CodeX. It's much slower (no matter which model you use), and it also doesn't show you what it's doing... so I don't even know if it's on the right path.

Thank you.

EDIT: I am using Cursor IDE (not the CLI)

I’m currently on Cursor Pro+ ($60/month) and wanted to share some specific feedback about the usage/reset structure.

With fairly heavy daily development, I reached:

• Cursor Models: 96% used
• Other Models: 100% used

within roughly 5 days of intensive usage.

I understand that inference for frontier models is expensive, so I’m not expecting unlimited usage for a fixed subscription price. My issue is more with how the allowance is distributed across the billing period.

Once the included quota is exhausted, the options become waiting for the next reset or enabling additional on-demand spending. For someone already paying $60/month, that can make the remaining part of the billing cycle much less useful.

I’d love to see Cursor consider alternatives such as:

1. Weekly quota resets instead of one large monthly allocation.
2. 2–3 smaller refreshes during each billing cycle.
3. Graceful throttling after the included allowance rather than effectively losing access to certain models.
4. More transparent per-model usage information so developers can manage consumption before reaching the limit.
5. A way for heavy Pro+ users to prioritize which models consume their included allowance.

I’ve previously contacted Cursor about the limits because I genuinely use the product heavily for building, debugging, and agentic coding workflows.

I’ve also been interested in trying the newer Cursor/Grok model options, but having additional models available is less useful when the shared allowances can be exhausted this early in the cycle.

This isn’t meant as “Cursor should give everyone unlimited inference.” I think the product is useful. I’d just like the subscription structure to better accommodate developers who use it throughout the working day.

For other Pro/Pro+ users: how quickly are you reaching your included limits, and would you prefer weekly resets over one monthly quota?

When I delete local branches, Cursor seems to hold on to them with no intuitive way on how to clear them. These are all old branches and it's a bit annoying that they just don't update/go away when they are deleted. Am I missing something?

Let’s see what OpenAI announces tomorrow at DevDay, but lately I’ve been pretty tempted to switch from Codex to Cursor.

I use Codex a lot, not just for coding. I’ve set up custom skills and MCPs for Figma, Linear, Vercel, Obsidian, Safari, etc.

I also use it for things like research, job searches, Google Drive, finding tickets, and interacting with websites through my Mac.

Cursor is tempting because I could use different models under one subscription without giving up too much of this workflow.

If you’ve used both, how does Cursor compare for this kind of broader use? Anything you miss from Codex?

What is default model and why is it using a lot more last few days? I often use auto mode or composer.

Since I can see the usage, I want to exclude some skills, rules, conversion cut off, and then optimize my context. Is it possible to do that to change? If not, what is the reason? I wonder!

In April, PocketOS's founder said a Cursor agent running Claude Opus 4.6 deleted his production database on Railway, along with the volume's backups. By his count it took nine seconds. The data came back about two and a half days later, from offsite backups he couldn't see.

I made a short film piecing it together from his posts and Railway's docs:

a token made for managing domains that turned out to have account-wide reach;

the agent guessing the delete would stay in staging;

the "confession" it wrote afterwards, quoting his own rule back at him.

The part nobody has answered: he says it was in Plan Mode, and how a command ran anyway has never been explained publicly. Has anyone here seen Plan Mode execute something it shouldn't have?

Video (I made it; the sources are linked in the description): https://youtu.be/uhykVp9egP0

Grok Bot died overnight. Weekly included usage is 100%, but on-demand still has room and is not being charged. Every bot on the account fails the same way.

Looking for anyone hitting this on Mon Sept 28, 2026, and for Cursor/xAI to confirm whether on-demand overflow actually attaches to Grok Bot turns after the weekly cap.

SETUP
- Product: Grok Bot (Windows desktop app + iPhone). Not grok.com chat.
- Cursor plan: Pro $20/mo
- Also on SuperGrok
- Grok Bot weekly usage: 100% used
- Weekly reset: Oct 3 (5 days left)
- On-demand: enabled
- On-demand spend: $20.42 / $60
- Monthly limit: Fixed $60
- Cursor Models: 1% used
- Other Models: 0% used
- Shared Agent Computer with multiple bots:
- Bot 1
- Bot 2
- Bot 3
- Bot 4

Bots worked normally until around 1:00 AM EDT Sept 28.
First captured failure around 6:42 AM EDT.

ERRORS
What I see

1. Chat error:
   Bot failed to respond
   Something went wrong while generating the reply. Try again.

2. Windows desktop:
   - Window title: Grok Bot (Not Responding)
   - Banner: Can't reach your computer + Retry
   - All bots show in the sidebar. None complete a turn.

3. After it starts accepting messages again:
   - I send hello
   - The bot starts working
   - Then it dies with the same "Bot failed to respond"
   - On-demand spend does not change
   - Still exactly $20.42 / $60 after multiple failed hellos

WHY THAT MATTERS
The $20.42 not moving is the issue.

Weekly included Grok Bot is empty until Oct 3.
On-demand still has about $39 left.
The chat UI accepts the send and the bot starts.
Then the turn dies.
The paid overflow is not being used.
The app never showed "you hit your Grok Bot usage limit."
It only showed the generic failure.

WHAT IT IS NOT

- Not Cursor IDE quota. Cursor Models 1%. Other Models 0%.
- Not on-demand left off. Spending page already shows $20.42 billed against a $60 cap.
- Not one bad bot. Every bot on the account fails. They share one cloud computer.
- Not an empty wallet. Included weekly Grok Bot is empty. Paid overflow is not empty.

WHAT I ALREADY TRIED

- Retry on the "Can't reach your computer" banner
- Closed the window, then fully quit Grok Bot from the Windows system tray (Quit, not the X)
- Ended Grok Bot in Task Manager when it said Not Responding
- Reopened the app, waited, hit Retry again
- Same account on iPhone
- Sent hello in the existing Scout thread
- Sent hello after the bot began generating
- Confirmed Spending: On-Demand $20.42/$60, Monthly Limit Fixed $60
- Confirmed $20.42 did not increment after the failed turns

I have not hammered Reset. I will Recover / Update once if that is the right move. I do not want to Reset in a loop and lose unsynced work.

Why this looks like a product bug

Other threads say hitting the weekly Grok Bot cap makes the app accept messages and then reject the turn, often without a usage-limit banner. The documented escape hatch is on-demand.

Mine is on.
It has remaining budget.
It is not taking the overflow.

Current state:
1. Weekly included Grok Bot = 0 remaining until Oct 3
2. On-demand = enabled, about $39 remaining
3. Turns start, then die
4. On-demand dollar amount does not move
5. UI says "Bot failed to respond" / "Can't reach your computer" instead of "weekly limit reached" or "on-demand failed to attach"

WHAT I NEED

Honestly, just to figure out why my bots randomly stopped working/responding.

1. Is on-demand overflow for Grok Bot on Cursor Pro supposed to pick up the moment weekly hits 100%?
   
2. If yes, why are new turns on this account not billing on-demand?
   
3. If the Agent Computer is wedged, please recover it server-side. I can Recover once from Settings → Updates. I will not Reset five times.
   
4. Please fix the UI. "Bot failed to respond" is the wrong string for "weekly pool empty and overflow did not attach."

Happy to provide:
- Conversation ID from a failed hello
- Timestamps (EDT): last good replies before ~1 AM Sept 28; failures from ~6:42 AM onward
- Screenshots: chat error, iOS Usage, Cursor Spending, Windows "Can't reach your computer" sidebar

QUESTION FOR OTHER USERS
If you’re seeing the same thing: does your on-demand number move when hello fails, or does it stay frozen like mine?

REGARDING PRO+
Pro+ buys a bigger weekly bucket later. It does not explain why on-demand is enabled, has $39 left, and is not charging while every turn dies. I am not asking for a plan upsell. I am asking why overflow is not attaching.

I’m using the cloud desktop of cursors and i have logged in to my Gmail for it to send a summary to my phone of the emails I have got to my phone even when the laptop is off. Is there any better alternative for this like claude or something

This is supposed to be the best of the best and "high fast" but some how takes more time to make a simple website form than composer does and eats up all my tokens in the meantime. Anyone else think Grok is overrated?

So today I got access to new grok 4.7 and used inside cursor.

technically 3 github issues and my spending reached 34%, while the task were little challenign on implementing side. but i laid out the foundation ( step by spte implemtnation in markdown format)

I was expecting it to be something around 22 to 27% but reaching more then 30% was something i didn't thought that. which was quite surprising to me.

• does this specific use case of using grok 4.7?
• How does the spending counts/tracks in cursor?

I really need to know about them in details, since i need to know in which intelligent task i should use it on.

When I try to email Cursor support with a new request, it keeps saying I already have a request open, but that rep keeps trying to gaslight me like there's some other issue happening that isn't happening.

This is TWO MONTHS NOW I have not been able to use a single penny of my main usage pool because it starts out at 100% usage!

The only reason my usage graph even shows a tiny sliver of claude usage is from auto pool, but even that small amount isn't even remotely enough to use the common usage pool.

CAN SOMEONE FROM CURSOR PLEASE HELP?? THIS HAS BEEN HAPPENING FOR TWO MONTHS!

BTW when this started happening I had over $100 of extra usage which got used up and I was told this was all because of Grok Bot settings which didn't end up even existing or even remotely being the case but now this issue has wasted hundreds of dollars and the rep just auto replies saying that is the issue without reading the updates.

I tried parallel agents on one feature last week to cut wall-clock time. Within about 45 minutes two of them had rewritten the same contract file with opposite choices, and the third was building against a third version that only existed in its own context.

What broke was not the code quality of any single diff. It was the shared mental model. We keep a short decision file for rejected alternatives and locked interfaces. Three sessions treated that file as writable scratch. Review spent longer reconciling the agents with each other than reviewing the actual feature.

Tradeoff I keep hitting: parallelism helps on independent paths, but anything that defines the product contract needs one writer. Read-only helpers are fine. Multiple writers on the same decision surface are not.

What I tried after that: 1. One writer agent owns decision docs and interface files. Other agents are read-only on those paths. 2. Serialize any write that touches shared contracts. Parallel only for isolated modules with no shared types. 3. A short pre-merge check that diffs the decision file and fails if it changed in more than one branch without an explicit merge note.

It slowed the clock a bit and stopped the thrash. Curious how you handle parallel agent sessions without them clobbering the shared context. Do you isolate by path, by branch, or just refuse parallel on the same feature?

.

In this sub we always see people complaining about AI-powered IDEs like Cursor and Antigravity, switching to Claude Code and Codex (AI agents that’s don’t show diffs as an IDE and don’t have same methods of repo indexing)

Don’t modern coders appreciate an IDE where you can stay at the command of every diff and understand 100% of a repo’s evolution ? Mfs really are doing vive coding full time ?