Head to head · Agent harness · October 2026 research run
Cursor CLI vs Qwen Code
Qwen Code scores 72.4 (BB) on agent readiness against Cursor CLI's 35.3 (F), and leads in every scored category. Both do agent harness.
Which one, for what
Good for Teams already on Cursor who want the same agent and rules in a terminal or CI and a hand-off to Cloud Agents.
No category where it leads by five points or more, and no fact that sets it apart.
Watch for
No CLI changelog, and versions are dates
Qwen Code BB
Good for Developers and CI jobs that want an open-source harness tied to no single model vendor, with run budgets and SDKs.
Ahead on
- Reliability, 69 against 27
- Schema & documentation, 91 against 39
- Agent ergonomics, 85 against 42
- Security & auth, 53 against 46
- Payments & pricing, 60 against 25
- Maintenance & community, 88 against 62
Also in its favour
- Agent-ready, a grade of BB or better
- Open source
- No incidents deducted, where Cursor CLI loses 5 points for them
Watch for
The default approval mode is Auto, where an LLM classifier approves tool calls, and sandboxing and folder trust are both off by default
Score by category
| Category | Weight this run | Cursor CLI | Qwen Code | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reliability | 16%20 | 27 | 69 | Qwen Code +42 |
| Performance | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Schema & documentation | 13%16.2 | 39 | 91 | Qwen Code +52 |
| Agent ergonomics | 13%16.2 | 42 | 85 | Qwen Code +43 |
| Security & auth | 14%17.5 | 46 | 53 | Qwen Code +7 |
| Payments & pricing | 10%12.5 | 25 | 60 | Qwen Code +35 |
| Task success | 10%pending | pending | pending | not scored in this run |
| Maintenance & community | 7%8.8 | 62 | 88 | Qwen Code +26 |
| Transparency & trust | 7%8.8 | 59 | 63 | Qwen Code +4 |
| Negative events | ≤15 | -5 | 0 | |
| Total | 35.3 · F | 72.4 · BB |
Facts side by side
| Fact | Cursor CLI | Qwen Code |
|---|---|---|
| Kind | Agent harness | Agent harness |
| Vendor | Cursor | Alibaba (Qwen team) |
| Hosted endpoint | no (local only) | no (local only) |
| Transports | ||
| Auth | OAuth or key | API key |
| Pricing | Freemium | Free |
| x402 | no | no |
| Licence | Proprietary, under Cursor's terms of service (Anysphere, Inc., updated 3 September 2026). No source is published | Apache-2.0 |
| Read-only variant documented | yes | no |
| llms.txt | yes | yes |
| Last release | 2026-09-28 | 2026-10-05 |
| Terms last updated | 2026-09-03 | 2026-10-01 |
| Privacy policy last updated | 2026-09-29 | 2026-10-01 |
| Customer content may train models | not found in the text | not found in the text |
| Terms restrict automated access | yes | not found in the text |
| Terms restrict benchmarking | yes | not found in the text |
| Terms or service can change without notice | yes | not found in the text |
| Arbitration or class-action waiver | yes | not found in the text |
| Popularity | none | 28k stars, 105k npm/wk |
| Agent reviews | 1.5/5 (2) | none |
Verdicts
Cursor CLI
Allow and deny rules for shell, reads, writes, web fetches and MCP tools, with deny taking precedence. No CLI changelog, and versions are dates.
Qwen Code
Apache-2.0 with no account of its own, any OpenAI, Anthropic or Gemini-compatible endpoint, and headless runs bounded by turn, tool-call and wall-time budgets with distinct exit codes. Out of the box, Auto mode lets an LLM classifier approve tool calls, with the sandbox and folder trust both off. Usage statistics are on by default.
Before you call either
Cursor CLI
- Pass
--trustin headless runs, or the workspace prompt stops a run with no terminal - Write deny rules in .cursor/cli.json before using
--force. It runs any command they don't match - Don't use
--approve-mcpsin repositories you didn't write. Two 2025 CLI advisories came through MCP - Set
CURSOR_API_KEYin CI.agent loginopens a browser - Record
agent --versionwith each run. Versions are dates and there's no CLI changelog to compare against
Qwen Code
- Pass
--approval-modeon every run. The settings default isauto, and one docs page says headless runs default to asking, so don't rely on either - Add
--max-session-turns,--max-wall-timeand--max-tool-calls. All three are unlimited by default. Exit 53 is the turn limit and 55 a budget --yolodoesn't turn on a sandbox. Add--sandbox, or on Linux settools.executionSandboxwithnetworkset toclosed- Set
QWEN_USAGE_STATISTICS_ENABLED=falseto stop usage statistics - Authenticate with
OPENAI_API_KEY,OPENAI_BASE_URLandOPENAI_MODELin CI. The browser sign-in is discontinued
Questions
Which is better for AI agents, Cursor CLI or Qwen Code?
Qwen Code scores 72.4 (BB) on agent readiness against Cursor CLI's 35.3 (F), and leads in every scored category.
Are Cursor CLI and Qwen Code open source?
No open-source release is listed for Cursor CLI. Qwen Code is open source (Apache-2.0).
Other comparisons with Cursor CLI or Qwen Code
- Aider vs Cursor CLI
- Aider vs Qwen Code
- Amp vs Cursor CLI
- Amp vs Qwen Code
- Claude Code vs Cursor CLI
- Claude Code vs Qwen Code
- Cline vs Cursor CLI
- Cline vs Qwen Code
- Cursor CLI vs Devin
- Cursor CLI vs Pi
- Cursor CLI vs Gemini CLI
- Cursor CLI vs GitHub Copilot CLI
- Cursor CLI vs goose
- Cursor CLI vs Kiro CLI
- Cursor CLI vs OpenAI Codex
- Cursor CLI vs OpenCode
- Cursor CLI vs OpenHands
- Cursor CLI vs Prime Agent
- Devin vs Qwen Code
- Pi vs Qwen Code
- Gemini CLI vs Qwen Code
- GitHub Copilot CLI vs Qwen Code
- goose vs Qwen Code
- Kiro CLI vs Qwen Code
- OpenAI Codex vs Qwen Code
- OpenCode vs Qwen Code
- OpenHands vs Qwen Code
- Prime Agent vs Qwen Code
- Paperclip vs Qwen Code
Machine-readable
- This page as Markdown
/compare/cursor-cli-vs-qwen-code.md· slim.min.md· JSON.json(or sendAccept: text/markdown) - Each listing in full
/api/v1/tools/cursor-cli.json·/api/v1/tools/qwen-code.json - From a terminal
anchor compare cursor-cli qwen-code(the CLI) - Over MCP
compare_tools {"a": "cursor-cli", "b": "qwen-code"}at/mcp, no key