Cursor CLI, Codex and Gemini work too, but lag slightly behind in a variety of different ways that matter.
And if you think you’re getting better visual feedback through Cursor it’s likely you’re just not using Claude with your IDE correctly.
Also, cursor is both overpriced and very mediocre as an agent. Codex is the way to go.
Tools are for us to figure out what works and what does not. Saying be prepared to be disconnected sounds like slop by someone getting forced into someone else’s idea.
If someone has a great workflow using a tool like codex that’s great but it does not mean it has to work for me. I love using codex for code reviews, testing and other changes that are independent of each other, like bugs. I don’t like using it for feature work, I have spent years building software and I am not going to twiddle my thumbs waiting for codex on something I am building real time. Now I think there is an argument that if you have the perfect blueprint of what to build that you could leverage a tool like codex but I am often not in that position.
Once we collectively start actually engineering AI coding systems rather than trying to surf on vibes their power will become much more apparent to the naysayers who haven't invested the time in the processes and tools.
As for backing it up, if you want to hop on my company github you can check out the spark graphs for my projects, and feel free to poke around the code I've spent time tightening to see that it's not slop (have fun with the async simd rust in valknut/scribe), and keep in mind I have large private projects (>200k) that are active as well. I've probably delivered 400k LoC in the last month with >60% coverage on large codebases, 99.99% AI generated.