Short answer: Consider Google Antigravity if you want interactive and background agent workflows, or want to build agents with its Python SDK. Consider Cursor if editable plans, code checkpoints, and dedicated review of local changes suit the way you code. Neither product subscription is the same thing as a production inference API for your application. This comparison reflects product information available on November 8, 2026; features and plan terms can change.
How do the coding workflows differ?
| Google Antigravity | Cursor | |
|---|---|---|
| Product and workflow | Google describes interactive pair-programming and background agent workflows independent of a single IDE. It also documents a Python SDK for building agents. | Cursor’s Agent works with a codebase, edits files, and runs terminal commands. Its documentation describes an editor-based workflow with planning, checkpoints, and code review. |
| Review and control | Antigravity documents interactive work and background agents. The sources reviewed here do not establish a specific review feature comparable to Cursor’s documented checkpoints and Agent Review. | Plan Mode lets you review and edit a proposed plan before building. Checkpoints let you preview and restore code states. Agent Review runs a dedicated review on local changes. |
| Model and API options | The personal plans documentation says BYOK and custom endpoints are not supported for additional rate limits. Google separately documents an Antigravity agent through the Gemini API; production eligibility for that channel is not established here. | Cursor supports BYOK for chat models, subject to plan-specific rules. Cursor also has APIs for programmatic access to Cursor agents and team data; those are not general-purpose model inference APIs for your application. |
The evidence supports a workflow comparison, not a claim about which tool produces better code or works faster. Google describes Antigravity’s interactive and background workflows; Cursor documents specific planning, checkpoint, and review features. (Antigravity overview, Cursor Agent, Cursor Plan Mode, Cursor Agent Review)
Which tool fits your way of working?
- Lean toward Antigravity if you want both interactive and background agent work, or want to develop agents using its Python SDK. That is a fit based on the documented workflow and SDK—not proof that Antigravity is better for every automated task. Google’s personal plans documentation says BYOK or a custom endpoint cannot be used to add rate limits. (Antigravity overview, Antigravity SDK, Antigravity plans)
- Lean toward Cursor if you want to inspect and edit an agent’s plan before implementation, restore a checkpoint, or run a dedicated review on local changes. These features make review steps explicit; they do not guarantee that a review catches every issue. (Cursor Plan Mode, Cursor Agent, Cursor Agent Review)
- For a team, compare governance and billing separately. Antigravity says team access is under Google Cloud terms. Cursor offers team seats with centralized billing and administration; Enterprise is custom-priced. Check the terms that apply to your organization before choosing. (Antigravity plans, Cursor team pricing)
Example: For a checkout-flow change, a Cursor user can ask Plan Mode for an editable implementation plan, then inspect a checkpoint or run Agent Review on local changes. An Antigravity user can choose an interactive or background agent workflow, or use its Python SDK when building an agent. These examples reflect documented features, not hands-on test results or a guarantee that either tool will pass your tests.
Production model APIs: three different meanings
API support can mean configuring an external provider key inside a coding tool, calling an API exposed by the coding product, or connecting a deployed application to a model provider. Those are separate use cases.
- Using your own provider key in Cursor: Cursor documents BYOK for chat models, and the provider bills the model cost. Individual plans do not pay Cursor’s Token Rate. On Teams and Enterprise, eligible third-party model requests—including requests made with your own key—also incur a Cursor Token Rate of $0.25 per million tokens for input, output, and cached tokens, in addition to provider charges. Some models are exempt; check the current eligibility rules. Custom keys do not power Tab completions, which continue using Cursor’s built-in models. (Cursor API keys, Cursor Token Rate)
- Building or calling an Antigravity agent: Google documents a Python SDK for building agents and separately documents a managed Antigravity agent available through the Gemini API’s Interactions API and Google AI Studio. Google Cloud’s Managed Agents API on Agent Platform is a separate offering whose terms restrict it to limited testing and evaluation, not commercial or production use. The documentation reviewed here does not establish whether that restriction applies to the separately documented Gemini API Antigravity-agent channel—or establish that channel’s production eligibility. (Antigravity SDK, Antigravity agent in the Gemini API, Google Cloud Managed Agents API terms)
- Calling a model from your deployed application: Configure a production API from the provider separately, with its own credentials, billing, and runtime. A coding-tool subscription or a key configured for in-tool chat is not, by itself, your application’s production inference setup. Cursor’s documented APIs cover Cursor-related capabilities such as agents and team data, not a general model API. (Cursor APIs)
API bottom line: Cursor documents in-tool BYOK for chat, with a separate Cursor Token Rate for eligible third-party model requests on Teams and Enterprise. Antigravity offers agent-development options, including a Gemini API channel, but production eligibility for that specific channel is not established by the documentation cited here. Do not extend the Google Cloud Managed Agents API restriction to that separate channel without applicable terms.
Pricing, limits, and availability
| Purchase detail | Google Antigravity | Cursor |
|---|---|---|
| Entry and paid plans | The official pricing page lists individual access at $0/month. Google AI Pro and Google AI Ultra are also offered, but the pricing page reviewed here does not list their dollar amounts. Organization access is under Google Cloud terms. | Current US pricing lists Free: $0/month, Plus: $8/month, Premium: $30/month, Super: $100/month, and Ultra: $200/month. The current plan information lists monthly prices; annual prices are not included here. Listed prices exclude applicable taxes or fees. |
| Usage and limits | All plans have baseline features. Google AI Pro gets a quota refresh every five hours until its weekly limit; Google AI Ultra gets a five-hour refresh and the highest weekly limits. Users outside Pro and Ultra receive a quota refreshed weekly. Google says quotas vary with agent work and may change. Pro and Ultra users can use purchased AI credits for overage usage. | Paid plans include a weekly pool for Cursor models shared with Grok. Premium, Super, and Ultra list 4×, 15×, and 50× Plus usage. Third-party models are not included in the pool; on Premium and above they are billed at API list price from prepaid credit. |
| Teams | Team access is under Google Cloud terms. The reviewed Antigravity pricing page does not provide a specific team price. | Teams seats are $30, $100, or $200 per user/month, matching Premium, Super, or Ultra. Enterprise is custom-priced. Existing teams on legacy plans keep their plans unless they switch or cancel; those plans are not available to new customers. |
The plan prices are not a direct measure of comparable model usage. Cursor’s included pool is shared with Grok, and third-party model charges can be additional. Antigravity’s quotas depend on account tier and agent work; its pricing page reviewed here does not show Google AI Pro or Ultra dollar amounts. Check the applicable plan and billing terms before budgeting. (Antigravity plans, Antigravity pricing, Cursor pricing and plans, Cursor Models & Pricing, Cursor team pricing, Cursor legacy plans)
Bottom line
Choose Antigravity if its interactive and background agent workflows—or its Python SDK for building agents—match your needs. Choose Cursor if editable plans, checkpoints, and local-change review match your preferred control points. For production model APIs, distinguish in-tool BYOK and coding-agent APIs from a deployed application’s inference API. The Google Cloud Managed Agents API restriction applies to that offering; production eligibility for the separate Gemini API Antigravity-agent channel is not established by the documentation cited here. The available evidence does not establish a universal winner for code quality, speed, or total cost.
Sources
Plans | Google Antigravity Docs
Antigravity agent | Gemini API
Managed Agents API on Agent Platform overview
Bring your own API key | Cursor Docs
Cursor Token Rate | Cursor Docs
Pricing and plans | Cursor Docs