Cursor Code Tools

Cursor Prompts: 6 That Use the Context Already Loaded

Cursor is a real-time pair rather than a background worker, so the prompts that work in it are different from the ones that work in Codex or Claude Code. These six lean on having the editor context already loaded. Worth knowing that Cursor meters its own models generously while third-party models like Claude and GPT bill at API rates, so the pool that empties is the frontier one.

⌨️ 6 prompts 🕐 Updated Aug 28, 2026

💡 How to use these prompts: Replace everything in [BRACKETS] with your specific details before sending. Click Copy to copy any prompt to your clipboard instantly.

Explain this file before I change it

The most useful thing to do before editing unfamiliar code, and the step most people skip.

Explain what this file does, in this order:

1. Its job in one sentence
2. What calls it and what it calls
3. Any assumption it makes that is not written down
4. The part most likely to break if I change it

Do not suggest improvements. I want to understand it first.

Refactor without changing behaviour

The negative rules are what keep the diff small, and small diffs merge more often.

Refactor the selected code for readability only.

Rules:
- Behaviour must be identical. If you are unsure, leave it alone and say why
- Do not rename anything exported or public
- Do not reorganise imports or reformat untouched lines
- Do not add comments explaining what the code obviously does

Show me the diff and list anything you deliberately left alone.

Write the test I actually need

The last instruction catches design problems. Hard-to-test usually means badly factored.

Write tests for the selected function.

Cover:
- The normal case
- The edge case most likely to occur in production
- The failure mode that would be hardest to debug from a log

Skip trivial assertions and do not test the language. If the function is hard to test as written, tell me why before writing anything.

Find why this is slow

Stops premature optimisation of whatever the model noticed first rather than what is actually slow.

This code is slower than expected. Before suggesting fixes:

1. Tell me what you think the bottleneck is and why
2. Tell me what measurement would confirm or disprove that
3. Rank the candidates by expected impact against effort

Do not optimise anything yet. I want the hypothesis first.

Match the existing style

Cursor has the surrounding context loaded already. This is the prompt that uses it.

Look at the surrounding files, then write [DESCRIBE WHAT YOU WANT] in the same style.

Match: naming conventions, error handling approach, how tests are structured, and how much is abstracted versus inlined here.

If the existing style is inconsistent, tell me which pattern is dominant and follow that.

Decide whether to fix or rewrite

Models default to suggesting a rewrite. Asking for a defended position gets a more honest answer.

This code has grown difficult to work with: [DESCRIBE]

Tell me honestly whether to keep patching it or rewrite it. Cover:
- What a rewrite would cost in time and risk
- What breaks during the transition
- Whether the underlying design is wrong or just the implementation
- What you would do if it were your codebase

Pick one and defend it.