Lanes vs Cursor

Cursor and Lanes both help you code with AI, but they solve different problems. Cursor is an AI-native editor: you write code with an assistant alongside you. Lanes is a workspace for running coding agents in parallel: you hand off tasks and orchestrate several agents at once.

This page is about where each one earns its keep, and why plenty of developers run both.

At a glance

Dimension	Lanes	Cursor
Shape	Workspace that orchestrates CLI agents	AI-native code editor
Parallel agents	Many, one per issue, each isolated	One assistant in your editor
Isolation	A git worktree and branch per session	Your single working tree
Agents	Official Claude Code and Codex CLIs	Cursor's built-in models and agent
Planning and review	Board columns from Backlog to Done	Inline, as you edit
Billing	Your existing CLI subscription	Cursor subscription
Model providers	Your subscription, a local model, or any provider you point at, chosen per session	Cursor's routing, with your own API keys as an option
Runs	Locally, on your machine	Local editor
Docs	Lanes Desktop docs	cursor.com

Where Lanes fits

Lanes is for when one agent is not enough. You plan work as issues, start a session per issue, and each agent runs in its own worktree so nothing collides. You keep oversight of the whole fleet on one board, and sessions run the official CLI, so they use the plan you already pay for rather than a separate meter.

That last point matters in practice: a session is the real claude or codex binary in a real terminal, with the model and reasoning effort you choose at launch. Lanes adds the workspace around the CLI, not a proxy in front of it.

Where Cursor fits

Cursor is a strong single-seat editor when you want an AI assistant in the loop as you write, review, and refactor in one file tree. If your work is one focused stream at a time inside an editor, Cursor is a natural fit. Nothing in Lanes replaces that inner loop: the editing, the suggestions, the conversation next to the code.

How Lanes does it

Sessions are real terminals. Each one is a PTY running the official CLI, attached to an issue. Start it in Plan mode to get an approach proposed before any edits, or Implement mode to start the work immediately. Status (busy, awaiting input, stopped) shows on the card, with a bell when the agent needs you. See working with sessions.
Worktrees keep agents apart. Lanes creates a branch and working directory per issue under .worktrees/, warns before removing anything with uncommitted work, and cleans up automatically when the issue completes. See worktree management.
The board is the control surface. Columns from Backlog to Done, bulk actions, and per-project and per-worktree tabs. Review happens on the diff, per branch, before you merge. See the issue board.
The model is yours to choose, per session. A Gateway profile points a session at a provider you host or buy: a local Ollama, a vLLM box on your network, OpenRouter, or z.ai GLM. It is applied as process environment at launch, so requests go straight from the CLI to your provider and Lanes is never in the path. Local LLMs goes further and manages Ollama end to end.

Choose Lanes if

You want to run several agents at once, each on its own branch.
You want to keep using Claude Code or Codex on your existing subscription.
You want a board to plan, track, and review agent work.
You want plan-first runs you approve before any code changes.
You want some of that work running on a model on your own hardware.

Choose Cursor if

You want an AI-native editor for hands-on coding.
You work one task at a time and like staying in the editor.
You prefer one tool that is also your editor.

Lanes and Cursor are not mutually exclusive. Plenty of people write in an editor and hand parallel tasks to Lanes.