A coding agent isn't autocomplete: it's a program that reads your repository, edits files, runs commands, and commits on its own. As of August 2026 the three most used are Claude Code, OpenAI Codex, and Cursor. If you want a real free tier, Codex is the only one of the three that has one. If you want open source, none of the three is. Below: all eleven compared, with prices checked on official sites, licenses checked in the actual repository, and a verdict for each.
Last verified: September 30, 2026. We rechecked the model and IDE news on this page through September 30, 2026: OpenAI's GPT-6.1 Sol (DevDay, September 29), Claude Sonnet 5.5 for coding (September 28), Android Studio Bring Your Own Agent in Rabbit 2 canary (September 24), plus the earlier Grok 4.7 and Claude Opus 5.5 updates. Prices and licenses in the big table were last checked on official product sites on September 8, 2026, and we haven't rechecked all eleven since. This space changes weekly, so if you find a comparison whose verification date is more than two months old, distrust the table. Including ours.
What exactly is an AI coding agent?
It's a program that works on your project with some autonomy: it reads the files, decides what to change, writes the code, runs the tests, and retries when something fails. The difference from a classic assistant is the verb. An assistant suggests; an agent acts.
That difference carries a consequence worth understanding before you install anything: a coding agent runs with your permissions. It can delete files, push, burn tokens, and break things. Every tool here has some approval mechanism, but none of them excuses you from reviewing what it did.
And there's a second distinction almost no comparison makes, which is why this list mixes things that look incomparable: not all of these are agents. Some are the agent; others are the house the agent lives in.
What types of coding agents exist?
| Category | What it does | Tools |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal agent (CLI) | It is the agent. Runs in your terminal, on your repo | Claude Code, OpenAI Codex, Gemini CLI |
| IDE agent | The agent lives inside a graphical editor | Cursor, Android Studio (BYOA, canary) |
| Orchestrator | Doesn't write code: manages sessions of the agents above | Xirp |
| Agent workspace | Shared workspace where agents are teammates | Buzz, Cloudflare OS |
| Personal agent | General purpose agent that can also touch code | OpenClaw |
| Work agent | Doesn't write code: uses your apps for you from its own computer | Grok Bot |
| Browser SDK | Not an agent: the library you build one with | Stagehand |
Flattening all of these into one "best AI tools" list is the mistake nearly everyone makes, and it's why so many comparisons recommend things that don't compete with each other. An orchestrator doesn't replace an agent: it requires one. That's also why we keep the rest of the tools we've tested, from assistants to automation platforms, in a separate AI tools hub instead of forcing them into this ranking.
Comparison table: 11 coding agents (prices checked September 8, 2026)
| Tool | Type | License | Free tier | Entry price | Models | Platforms |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Code | CLI + IDE + desktop | Proprietary | No | $20/mo (Pro) | Anthropic only | macOS, Linux, Windows |
| OpenAI Codex | CLI + IDE + cloud | CLI Apache-2.0, service proprietary | Yes | $8/mo (Go) · Plus $20 | OpenAI only | macOS, Linux, Windows |
| Cursor | IDE | Proprietary | Yes (limited) | $20/mo (Pro) | Multi provider | macOS, Linux, Windows, web, iPad |
| Gemini CLI | CLI | Apache-2.0 | Not anymore | Code Assist license or API key | Gemini only | macOS, Linux, Windows |
| Antigravity CLI | CLI | Proprietary | Per Google plan | Bundled with Google AI plans | Multi model | macOS, Linux, Windows |
| Xirp | Orchestrator | Proprietary | Yes (beta) | No public price | Whatever it orchestrates | macOS only |
| Buzz | Workspace | Open source | Yes | Self hosted | Whatever you connect | Cross platform |
| Cloudflare OS | Workspace | Apache 2.0 | Yes | Self hosted | Whatever you connect | Cross platform |
| OpenClaw | Personal agent | MIT | Yes | Your tokens + hosting | 50+ providers | macOS, Linux, Windows |
| Grok Bot | Work agent | Proprietary | No | Bundled with eligible plans | Undisclosed | macOS, Windows, iPhone |
| Stagehand | Browser SDK | MIT | Yes (the SDK) | Free + infra + tokens | 5 providers + callback | TS, Python, Go |
Two readings of that table, because they're the ones most people skip:
The free tier barely exists. Of the three most used coding agents, only Codex has a genuine free tier. Claude Code has never had one. And Gemini CLI had one and lost it: Google cut free access on June 18, 2026.
Open source doesn't mean free, and free doesn't mean open. Gemini CLI is Apache-2.0 and you can't use it today without paying. OpenClaw is MIT and free, but the token bill is yours. Claude Code has a public repository with over 141,000 stars and is not open source: that repo doesn't contain the CLI's source code, only the changelog, examples, and the issue tracker.
Terminal agents
These go furthest without supervision, and this is where the real 2026 fight is.
Claude Code
Anthropic's agent, born as a CLI and now a single engine across many surfaces: terminal, VS Code and JetBrains extensions, desktop app, web, mobile, Slack, and CI.
Pricing. No free tier. Pro $20/mo ($17/mo billed annually), Max 5x $100/mo, Max 20x $200/mo, Team from $20/seat. Pay as you go alternative with an API key.
What doesn't get said. Limits aren't token based but 5 hour session windows plus a weekly cap, and Anthropic doesn't publish the numbers. Anthropic's temporary +50% weekly usage promotion for Claude Code ended on September 13, 2026. Since September 14, standard weekly limits sit 25% above the baseline from before the promotion, which is less than the promo gave you. The 5 hour session limits didn't change.
The default model changed on September 22, 2026. Claude Code 2.1.280 added Claude Opus 5.5 as the default Opus model and moved Pro and Team Standard plans from Sonnet to Opus, matching Max. So "Pro gets the weaker model" is no longer true by default, though Max still gives you 5x or 20x Pro's usage per session. Claude Fable 5.1, Anthropic's most expensive model, is where the plans still split: on Max it can use up to 50% of your weekly limits, on Pro it runs on usage credits.
Sonnet 5.5 still matters for coding cost. Anthropic released Claude Sonnet 5.5 on September 28, 2026 as the faster, lower-cost complement to Opus 5.5. On Anthropic's own numbers it scores 70.6% on Terminal-Bench 4.0 (against Sonnet 5's 10.3%) and 55.5% on CursorBench 4.0, within about two points of Opus 5.5. List price is $2 input and $10 output per million tokens, API id claude-sonnet-5-5. Use it for well-scoped everyday coding and bug fixes when the Opus bill hurts; keep Opus (or Fable) for sprawling, open-ended agent runs. Everyday docs and slides live in a separate guide: Claude Sonnet 5.5 for everyday work.
It only runs Claude models. The "third parties" in its docs (Amazon Bedrock, Microsoft Foundry, Google Cloud) are billing and infrastructure routes, not other models.
Verdict: best if you already pay for Pro or Max and work in the terminal on large repositories. Avoid it if you need an auditable license, vendor independence, or predictable budget.
OpenAI Codex
OpenAI's current agent, unrelated to the 2021 Codex model. Ships as a Rust CLI, an IDE extension, a desktop app, and a cloud environment that opens pull requests.
Pricing. Free $0, Go $8/mo, Plus $20/mo, Pro from $100/mo, Business $20/user/mo billed annually.
The license has a catch, and it's an honest one. The openai/codex repository is genuinely Apache-2.0, verified in its LICENSE file. But that covers the client only: models and service are proprietary and paid. Without a subscription or API key, the open binary does nothing.
Dated warning. Since August 31, 2026, GPT-5.4 and GPT-5.4 mini are no longer available in Codex for users who sign in with ChatGPT. Any comparison still recommending them is stale.
GPT-6.1 Sol is the cost pick under Codex. OpenAI shipped it on September 29, 2026 (DevDay). In ChatGPT it's in Work and Codex for Plus, Pro, Business, Enterprise, and Edu; it was not yet in ordinary Chat at launch. Developers call it as gpt-6.1-sol. See the model section below for when to pick it over Astra.
Verdict: best if you already pay for ChatGPT and want the same agent in terminal, IDE, and cloud, with the only real free entry point of the big three. Avoid it if you expected a model agnostic agent: its CLI only speaks the Responses API, so endpoints that only speak Chat Completions stopped working.
Gemini CLI (and its replacement, Antigravity CLI)
Here's news most comparisons haven't absorbed yet, and it invalidates their recommendations.
Gemini CLI exists, is Apache-2.0, and its code is still free and compilable. But as of June 18, 2026, Google stopped serving requests for the free tier, Google AI Pro, and Google AI Ultra. The cutoff shipped with no grace period and broke scripts, GitHub Actions, and CI pipelines. Today it only works with a Code Assist Standard or Enterprise license, or a paid API key.
Its official replacement is Antigravity CLI, invoked as agy. It's multi model (Gemini 3.6 Flash, 3.5 Flash, 3.1 Pro, Claude Sonnet 4.6, Claude Opus 4.6, and GPT-OSS-120b) but it is not open source: it's a closed binary.
Verdict: Google traded an open, free CLI for a closed, paid one. With Code Assist Enterprise, Gemini CLI is still a solid auditable option. If you came from the free tier, your move today is Codex.
The agent inside the editor
Cursor
Proprietary editor based on VS Code with agents built in. Since version 3.0 the product revolves around running several agents in parallel (local, worktrees, cloud, SSH) rather than around the classic editor.
Pricing. Hobby $0 with "limited agent requests" (Anysphere does not publish concrete free tier numbers). Pro $20/mo including $20 of third party model usage, Pro+ $60 including $70, Ultra $200 including $400.
That "includes $X of usage" model is the most important practical difference from Claude Code: you know exactly how much you've consumed, but the bill goes variable the moment you exceed it.
It's the most agnostic of the big ones: its own Composer model, SpaceXAI's Grok line (Grok 4.7, with Grok 4.6 still available), plus Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, Moonshot, and Z.ai. Cursor still describes Composer as its fast, cost efficient model for everyday coding.
The thing to know before you commit: On 14 August 2026 Cursor published an official post stating it is now part of SpaceX (previously reported only as a June 16 agreement for Anysphere). Grok models now land in Cursor on day one: Grok 4.7 went live there on September 21, 2026, the same day SpaceXAI announced it. That's not a value judgment: it's a change of ownership that can affect pricing and available models, and you're picking a daily driver.
Verdict: best if you want the most polished agent inside an editor you already know. Avoid it if you need auditable code, if your budget can't absorb a variable bill, or if your editor becoming a SpaceX subsidiary in August 2026 bothers you.
Android Studio (Bring Your Own Agent)
If you build Android apps, the editor itself just opened to third-party agents. On September 24, 2026 Google announced Bring Your Own Agent (BYOA) in the canary release of Android Studio Rabbit 2. You can plug in Anthropic's Claude Agent, OpenAI's Codex, or Google's Antigravity, wired through Agent Client Protocol (ACP), with Compose previews, Android SDK tools, and emulator control injected for the agent.
That's an IDE surface, not a twelfth agent on the price table. Cursor stays the polished general-purpose agent IDE. Android Studio BYOA is the mobile-native house: pick it when you already live in Studio and want Claude Agent, Codex, or Antigravity next to the emulator. It's still canary preview, so treat it as early access, not a stable daily driver for a production team yet. Source: Google's Android Developers Blog.
Verdict: best if your day job is Android and you want your existing Claude, Codex, or Antigravity plan inside Studio. Avoid it (for now) if you need a stable, non-canary IDE agent: stay on Cursor or the CLI until Rabbit 2 leaves canary.
Orchestrators and workspaces
This category is only a few months old and solves a problem you only have once you use agents seriously: four open sessions and no idea which one is touching what.
Xirp
Spotify desktop app, in public beta since August 10, 2026, that manages Claude Code, Codex, Gemini CLI, and Cursor sessions from a single interface. Each session runs in its own git worktree, so several agents work in parallel on the same repository without colliding. Persistence runs on tmux.
macOS only, no public pricing, and not open source: despite what many assumed from the Backstage precedent, Spotify's own documentation calls it proprietary. It doesn't orchestrate models, it orchestrates CLIs: you need them already installed and authenticated. As of 21 August 2026 Xirp also supports Cursor sessions in addition to Claude Code, Codex and Gemini CLI.
Verdict: interesting if you're on macOS and already have the four terminals problem. Premature for everything else: it's still beta, it only launched on August 10, 2026, and the only way to know if it survives is to wait.
Buzz
Jack Dorsey's workspace where AI agents are teammates rather than tools: they get their own channel, their own history, and they participate in the conversation. It's open source and built on open protocols, precisely the opposite bet from Xirp.
We broke it down in full in what Buzz is and how it works.
Cloudflare OS
Agent workspace under Apache 2.0, launched August 5, 2026, with sandboxed "gadgets" and "gatekeepers" for approving actions. The most ambitious of the three and the hardest to adopt today. Full analysis in what Cloudflare OS is.
Don't confuse it with the other launch from the same week: Cloudflare also shipped Kitesurf (August 6, 2026), and it is not an agent orchestrator. It's a headless browser written in Rust and WebAssembly, built so agents can browse without Chromium underneath. Different category, different problem.
The personal agent
OpenClaw
Not a coding agent, but people end up using it as one, so it belongs here. It's a self hosted runtime that routes messages between your chat apps (WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal, Slack, Discord) and the model you choose, with access to your shell, files, and browser.
MIT license verified in the LICENSE file, with no enterprise edition and no closed core. It's the most agnostic tool on this list: 50+ providers, including local models via Ollama, LM Studio, or vLLM.
Pricing. The software is free with no tiers. You pay the tokens of whichever provider you connect, plus hosting if you don't run it on your laptop (a typical VPS runs $3 to $50/mo).
And a warning that needs saying. Self hosting an agent with access to your shell and your WhatsApp carries real attack surface: a one click remote code execution vulnerability was reported in July 2026. If you're not going to read logs or audit the third party skills you install, this isn't your tool.
Verdict: best if you can administer a server and want an agent running on your keys and your data. Avoid it if "self hosted" sounds like a marketing word rather than a responsibility.
Grok Bot
Also not a coding agent, and that's why it comes last: it's a work agent. Announced by SpaceXAI (formerly xAI) on August 11, 2026, its pitch is different from everything above: it signs in to your applications from its own cloud computer and hands the finished work back to you.
We include it here because it marks the edge of the category: everything above writes code, this one uses applications. And because it raises the problem the rest of this list doesn't have yet: what happens to your credentials.
Pricing. Not sold separately: it's bundled with eligible Cursor plans (Pro, Pro+, Ultra), SuperGrok family plans, Cursor Teams (Standard/Premium), and Enterprise — see https://x.ai/bot. Token-based consumption may apply on top. No permanent free tier.
The thing to know. Its official documentation states that all your bots share one cloud computer, with files, browser sessions, and credentials available across the roster, and warns explicitly: "Do not use separate Bots as a security boundary."
Verdict: the most ambitious approach on this list, and also the one that asks the most of you. Before connecting it to anything corporate, read the full Grok Bot analysis, on what its fine print says about your credentials.
Stagehand
This one closes the list because it's the only entry that isn't a tool you use but a library you build with. It's Browserbase's SDK for letting a program drive a Chrome browser with natural language instructions instead of CSS selectors.
Its version 4, from August 10, 2026, is a rewrite: it drops Playwright as a dependency and moves the engine inside the browser as a Chrome extension.
Pricing. The SDK is MIT and free, and runs locally against your own Chrome. You pay separately for Browserbase's browser infrastructure (Developer $20/mo, Startup $99/mo) and for model tokens.
The thing to know. The version marketed as "the SDK for browser agents" is the same one that removes the agent() method. Its migration guide says so plainly: it's gone and nothing replaces it one for one. The reasoning is sound (every step of that agent was an inference call) but you want to know before migrating.
Verdict: for tests, Playwright, and free. For pages that change, nested iframes, or closed shadow DOM, Stagehand is objectively better. Full analysis in what is Stagehand.
Which model should run the agent? Grok 4.7, GPT-6.1 Sol, and peers
Picking the agent is half the decision. Cursor, GitHub Copilot, Claude Code, and Codex all let you choose the model underneath, and on plans that bill by usage, that choice decides what you pay.
GPT-6.1 Sol (OpenAI, September 29, 2026)
OpenAI's cost-routing pick for agentic coding. GPT-6.1 Sol is an upgrade to GPT-6 Sol that OpenAI positions as near-Astra intelligence on coding, computer use, and professional work at one-fifth of Astra's standard input and output token prices. API id: gpt-6.1-sol. Standard API list price: $2 input, $0.10 cached input, $10 output per million tokens. GPT-6 Astra sits at $10 input and $50 output on the same OpenAI model pages, which matches the one-fifth claim.
When to pick Sol vs Astra. Use Sol when you're running high-volume agent loops (Codex, Cursor with OpenAI, your own harness) and the token bill is the constraint: you get near-Astra coding quality at about a fifth of Astra's standard rates, and cached input at $0.10 per million tokens helps long sessions that reuse context. Reach for Astra when the task is the hardest reasoning or research work and you'd rather pay the flagship rate than leave quality on the table. Compare both on your tasks; OpenAI's launch post says the same. Don't mix this up with the older GPT-6 Sol (September 22) or with the "GPT-5.6 Sol" row in SpaceXAI's Grok 4.7 table below: those are different model strings.
Availability at launch: ChatGPT Work and Codex for Plus, Pro, Business, Enterprise, and Edu; not yet in ordinary Chat. Developers get it through the API as gpt-6.1-sol.
Grok 4.7 and the SpaceXAI peer table
The newest SpaceXAI entry is Grok 4.7, released on September 21, 2026. It went live that day in Cursor, in Grok Build and through the Grok API, and GitHub started a gradual rollout in Copilot the same day.
| Model | Input, $ per million tokens | Output, $ per million tokens | CursorBench 4.0 | Terminal-Bench 4.0 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grok 4.7 (xHigh) | $2 | $6 | 46.3% | 37.6% |
| GPT-5.6 Sol (Max) | $4 | $20 | 41.7% | 37.3% |
| Claude Fable 5.1 (Max) | $10 | $50 | 51.8% | 57.9% |
| Claude Opus 5.5 | $4 | $20 | Not in SpaceXAI's table | Not in SpaceXAI's table |
| Claude Sonnet 5.5 | $2 | $10 | 55.5% (Anthropic) | 70.6% (Anthropic) |
| GPT-6.1 Sol | $2 | $10 | Not in SpaceXAI's table | Not in SpaceXAI's table |
Prices and scores for the first three rows come from SpaceXAI's Grok 4.7 launch post. Opus 5.5 pricing comes from Anthropic's model docs. Sonnet 5.5 prices and CursorBench / Terminal-Bench scores come from Anthropic's Sonnet 5.5 launch. GPT-6.1 Sol prices come from OpenAI's Sol launch and the API model page.
Read that table with one eyebrow raised. The Grok rows come from the vendor that just shipped the model, and SpaceXAI picked both the rivals and the effort settings. Even the two launch posts disagree: SpaceXAI's table says 37.6% on Terminal-Bench 4.0, while Cursor's announcement says 38.0%. Anthropic's Sonnet scores and OpenAI's Sol pricing are each from their own primaries. Treat vendor scores as a claim until independent runs land, and treat the prices as the solid part.
What the prices do tell you is real. At $6 per million output tokens, Grok 4.7 costs about an eighth of Fable 5.1's output price. GPT-6.1 Sol and Sonnet 5.5 both list at $2 / $10, which is one-fifth of Astra's $10 / $50 and half of Opus 5.5's $4 / $20. Output is the expensive side on every row, so that's the price to compare.
Where it runs. In Cursor, Grok 4.7 sits in the model picker next to Composer and Grok 4.6. In GitHub Copilot it's available on Pro, Pro+, Max, Business and Enterprise, billed at provider list pricing under usage based billing, and Business and Enterprise admins can switch it off in the model policy. GPT-6.1 Sol runs in Codex, ChatGPT Work, and the OpenAI API as gpt-6.1-sol. Sonnet 5.5 runs wherever you already use Anthropic models, including Claude Code (API id claude-sonnet-5-5). Claude Code still doesn't run Grok or OpenAI models.
Verdict on GPT-6.1 Sol: best default OpenAI coding model when Astra's $50 output rate is overkill. Pick Astra for the hardest reasoning; pick Sol for near-Astra agentic coding at one-fifth the standard token price.
Verdict on Grok 4.7: best if you run long agent sessions in Cursor, Copilot or your own harness and the token bill matters. It trails Fable 5.1 by 5.5 points on CursorBench 4.0 at roughly an eighth of the output price. Avoid it for multi hour terminal work when you can afford the top tier: on SpaceXAI's own numbers it scores 37.6% on Terminal-Bench 4.0 against Fable 5.1's 57.9%. For quick everyday edits in Cursor, Cursor itself still points you to Composer.
Verdict on Sonnet 5.5 for coding: best Anthropic pick for well-scoped coding and bug fixes at $2 / $10. On Anthropic's numbers it lands within about two CursorBench points of Opus 5.5 and posts 70.6% on Terminal-Bench 4.0. Escalate to Opus 5.5 (or Fable 5.1) when the job is long-horizon and open-ended.
Which one should I pick?
| Your situation | Use | Why |
|---|---|---|
| You're learning to code | Codex (free tier) or Cursor Hobby | Start where you don't pay, and read the next section, because there's a right and a wrong way to use these while learning |
| You already pay for ChatGPT | Codex | Zero marginal cost, same agent in terminal, IDE, and cloud |
| You already pay for Claude Pro or Max | Claude Code | Same argument, and it goes furthest without supervision |
| You come from VS Code and won't switch | Cursor | Imports extensions, themes, and keybindings in one click |
| You build Android apps and want agents in Studio | Android Studio Rabbit 2 canary (BYOA) | Claude Agent, Codex, or Antigravity inside Studio with emulator and Compose tools; still canary |
| You need auditable code | OpenClaw, or Gemini CLI with a Code Assist license | The only ones with a real, verified OSI license |
| You don't want to be locked to one vendor | OpenClaw | 50+ providers, local models included |
| Four sessions open and you're lost | Xirp, if you're on macOS | That's exactly the problem it solves |
| Genuinely zero budget | Codex free tier or OpenClaw with local models | Everything else either has no free tier or won't publish its limits |
| Long agent runs and the token bill hurts | Grok 4.7 in Cursor/Copilot, or GPT-6.1 Sol / Sonnet 5.5 at $2/$10 | Cost-routing models; Astra and Fable stay for the hardest work |
| OpenAI coding, near-Astra quality, lower bill | GPT-6.1 Sol (gpt-6.1-sol) | $2 / $10 vs Astra's $10 / $50 |
| Anthropic coding, everyday scope | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | $2 / $10; escalate to Opus 5.5 when judgment sprawls |
| Multi hour terminal work, budget isn't the issue | Claude Fable 5.1 | 57.9% on Terminal-Bench 4.0 in SpaceXAI's own table, 20 points above Grok 4.7 |
What if I'm still learning to code?
None of the comparisons currently ranking answer this, and it's the question we get most. It goes in its own section because the answer is different.
The real risk isn't that the agent gets it wrong: it's that it gets it right. When an agent solves the exercise for you and it works, the learning loop breaks without you noticing. You finish with a working project and without having learned to debug, which is the skill you'll actually be paid for.
Three rules that work, starting today:
- Write first, ask second. Use the agent to review your code, not to write it. Same tool, reversed order, opposite effect.
- Never accept code you can't explain. If you can't say out loud what each line does, delete it and write it yourself. It's slow, and it's the shortcut.
- Use the agent for what you already know. Automating the boring part is fine once you can do it by hand. Automating what you don't know mortgages your judgment.
And one thing worth saying plainly: knowing how to use an agent will not differentiate you in 2027, because everyone will. What differentiates is understanding what's underneath: agent architecture, multi agent orchestration, RAG, evaluation. That's the layer 4Geeks Academy's AI Engineering for Developers program works on, if you already code and want to build with this rather than just consume it. If you work in tech but don't build yet, AI Engineering is the cohort path, with mentors and career support. If you already ship code and would rather go self paced, AI Flex starts with a diagnostic that skips what you know, on a monthly plan you can cancel.
What's new {#whats-new}
Sector changelog, with dates. Updated at the close of each month.
- September 29, 2026: OpenAI ships GPT-6.1 Sol at DevDay. Near-Astra positioning on coding and computer use at one-fifth of Astra's standard API token prices ($2 input, $0.10 cached input, $10 output per million tokens; API id
gpt-6.1-sol). Available in ChatGPT Work and Codex; not yet in ordinary Chat at launch. Source: OpenAI. - September 28, 2026: Anthropic releases Claude Sonnet 5.5 at $2 / $10 per million tokens (API id
claude-sonnet-5-5). Coding-tier claim on Anthropic's numbers: 70.6% Terminal-Bench 4.0 and 55.5% CursorBench 4.0. Everyday knowledge-work picker lives on a separate page; coding facts stay on this hub. Source: Anthropic. - September 24, 2026: Android Studio Rabbit 2 canary adds Bring Your Own Agent (BYOA) for Claude Agent, Codex, and Antigravity via ACP, with Compose previews and emulator tools. Source: Android Developers Blog.
- September 22, 2026: Anthropic releases Claude Opus 5.5 at $4 input and $20 output per million tokens, with a context window of 1M tokens. Claude Code 2.1.280 makes it the default Opus model and moves Pro and Team Standard plans from Sonnet to Opus.
- September 21, 2026: SpaceXAI releases Grok 4.7, live the same day in Cursor, Grok Build and the Grok API at $2 input and $6 output per million tokens. GitHub starts a gradual rollout in Copilot for Pro, Pro+, Max, Business and Enterprise.
- August 21, 2026: Xirp adds Cursor as a supported coding agent alongside Claude Code, Codex, and Gemini CLI (official Spotify Engineering announcement).
- August 14, 2026: Cursor is now part of SpaceX. Official company blog post confirms the acquisition of Anysphere (previously reported only as a June 16 agreement).
- August 10, 2026: Browserbase ships Stagehand v4, a rewrite of its browser navigation SDK for agents: Playwright dropped as a dependency, engine moved inside the browser as a Chrome extension.
- August 11, 2026: SpaceXAI (formerly xAI) announces Grok Bot, a work agent that operates applications from its own cloud computer, bundled with Cursor Ultra.
- August 5 and 6, 2026: Cloudflare launches Cloudflare OS (agent workspace) and Kitesurf (headless browser for agents).
- June 18, 2026: Google ends free tier access for Gemini CLI; Antigravity CLI becomes the paid multi model replacement.