Kiro vs Cursor: spec-driven IDE against AI code editor

What is the difference between Kiro and Cursor?

Kiro is AWS's agentic IDE that turns a feature request into written specs, requirements, a design and a task list, before its agent writes code. Cursor is an AI code editor built for writing code with fast autocomplete, an agent panel and a broad choice of models. Both are based on VS Code, so they look and feel familiar, but Kiro puts structure first and Cursor puts speed and flexibility first.

Both support AGENTS.md, Agent Skills, MCP servers and hooks, so a lot of your setup carries over. The bigger differences are the planning workflow, the models you can use and how each one bills. Everything below comes from the official docs and pricing pages as of 26 October 2026.

How does Kiro work?

The Kiro site says it is "Built and operated by AWS" and describes "agentic AI with an IDE, CLI, web interface, mobile app, and Kiro Crew." The FAQ says "Kiro is based on Code OSS, so you can import your VS Code settings, themes, and Open VSX compatible plugins," and "You do not need an AWS account to use Kiro." You sign in with GitHub, Google, AWS Builder ID or AWS IAM Identity Center.

Its core idea is the spec. The specs docs define specs as "structured artifacts that formalize the development process for features and bug fixes." Each one produces three files:

• requirements.md (or bugfix.md for bug fixes), with user stories and acceptance criteria. The feature specs page says requirements use EARS (Easy Approach to Requirements Syntax) notation.
• design.md, with architecture, sequence diagrams and implementation notes.
• tasks.md, a list of discrete, trackable tasks the agent works through.

Specs live in .kiro/specs/, one folder per feature, and the best practices page says "Specs are designed to be version-controlled, making them easily shareable across your team." A Quick Spec option generates all three files in one pass without approval gates. Our Kiro guide covers setup, steering and hooks in more depth.

How does Cursor work?

Cursor describes itself as "a coding agent for building ambitious software." Its VS Code migration page says "Cursor is based upon the VS Code codebase," and one click imports your extensions, themes, settings and keybindings.

Two features do most of the work:

• Tab, which the docs call "Cursor's AI-powered autocomplete." It suggests code as you type, based on recent edits, surrounding code and linter errors.
• Agent, which "can complete complex coding tasks independently, run terminal commands, and edit code," and saves checkpoints so you can roll back its changes.

For planning, Cursor has Plan Mode: "Plan Mode creates detailed implementation plans before writing any code." It asks clarifying questions, researches your codebase and gives you an editable plan. You reach it with Shift+Tab in the chat input. Plans save to your home directory by default, and "Save to workspace" moves one into the repo. See the Cursor Plan Mode guide.

Cursor also has a CLI that installs a command called agent, Cloud Agents that run in remote environments, and Bugbot for code review.

How do Kiro and Cursor compare side by side?

How do specs compare with Plan Mode?

This is the real choice between the two.

Kiro specs are files. Requirements, design and tasks each get their own Markdown file that you review, edit and commit. A Requirements-First flow starts from user stories and EARS acceptance criteria, a Design-First flow starts from architecture, and a Bugfix spec analyzes a bug before fixing it. Because the files live in the repo, a teammate can read why a feature was built the way it was, and the agent can work through tasks.md one item at a time.

Cursor Plan Mode is a conversation that ends in a plan. The agent asks questions, reads code and writes a plan you can edit before you tell it to build. It is quicker to start and sits inside the same chat you use for everything else. You can save a plan into the workspace if you want to keep it, but there is no fixed requirements and design structure.

If your team writes design docs or needs a paper trail for reviews, Kiro's specs match that habit. If you mostly want the agent to think before a medium-sized change, Plan Mode is lighter. If you like Kiro's structure but prefer another agent, the spec-driven development skill brings a similar flow to other tools.

How do steering, rules, skills and MCP compare?

Instructions. Kiro's steering docs put workspace files in .kiro/steering/ and global ones in ~/.kiro/steering/, each with an inclusion mode: always, fileMatch, manual or auto. Cursor's rules docs use .mdc files in .cursor/rules/ with four types: Always Apply, Apply Intelligently, Apply to Specific Files and Apply Manually. The ideas map closely.

Both read AGENTS.md. Kiro's docs say "AGENTS.md files do not support inclusion modes and are always included," and both tools also pick up AGENTS.md files in subdirectories. Keeping shared rules there is the easiest way to use both. See the Cursor rules guide for the .mdc format.

Skills. Both follow the Agent Skills format. Kiro's skills docs list .kiro/skills/ and ~/.kiro/skills/. Cursor's skills docs list .agents/skills/ and .cursor/skills/, and it also loads .claude/skills/ and .codex/skills/. A skill written for Claude Code or Codex works in Cursor as is, and needs copying into .kiro/skills/ for Kiro. The Cursor skills guide has details.

MCP. Kiro uses .kiro/settings/mcp.json for a workspace and ~/.kiro/settings/mcp.json globally, merged with workspace settings winning. Cursor uses .cursor/mcp.json and ~/.cursor/mcp.json. Both use an mcpServers style JSON, so moving a server definition is mostly copy and paste.

Hooks. Kiro's hooks docs say "Hooks run shell commands or agent prompts automatically when specific events happen in your session," with triggers such as PostFileSave and PreToolUse. Cursor's hooks docs say "Hooks let you observe, control, and extend the agent loop using custom scripts," configured in .cursor/hooks.json with events such as preToolUse and afterFileEdit. The Cursor hooks guide has examples.

How do models and pricing compare?

Kiro bills in credits. As of October 2026, Kiro's pricing page lists Free (50 credits a month), Pro ($20, 1,000 credits), Pro+ ($40, 2,000), Pro Max ($100, 5,000) and Power ($200, 10,000), with extra credits at $0.04 each and Enterprise through sales. The Free tier includes "Access to open weight models and Claude Sonnet 4.5" with rate limits, and the home page says there are "no daily or weekly rate limits" on credits. By default prompts go to Auto, which the FAQ calls "an agent that uses a mix of different frontier models," and you can also pick Claude, GPT or open weight models.

Cursor bills by plan and usage. As of October 2026, Cursor's pricing page lists Free, Plus ($8 a month), Premium ($30), Super ($100) and Ultra ($200), with Teams from $30 per user and custom Enterprise. Plus covers Grok models only. Premium and up add third-party models at API list price, Cloud Agents and AI code reviews. The Cursor pricing guide explains the usage pools.

In short, Kiro gives you a credit budget across a curated model set, and Cursor gives you a usage pool for its own models with pay-as-you-go access to many others.

Which should you pick?

Start with how your team plans work.

Kiro tends to fit when:

• You want requirements and designs written and reviewed before code, and committed next to it.
• Your team already works with AWS sign-in through IAM Identity Center.
• You like a single credit budget and the Auto model router.
• You want the agent to work through a committed task list, one task at a time.

Cursor tends to fit when:

• You write a lot of code yourself and want Cursor's Tab autocomplete.
• You want to switch between models from Anthropic, OpenAI, Google and Cursor.
• You want Cursor's Cloud Agents and Bugbot code reviews.
• You prefer a quick Plan Mode over a full spec process.

Both are VS Code based, so trying the other costs little. Keep shared rules in AGENTS.md and skills in a folder you can copy, and you can move between them without rewriting anything. For how Cursor compares with a terminal agent, see Claude Code vs Cursor.

Keep your skills and prompts in one place

Kiro and Cursor read skills from different folders, so it helps to keep the originals somewhere neutral. Kipt stores your prompts and Agent Skills as Markdown in a private GitHub repo you own, imports skills from a GitHub link, a folder or a .zip, and finds them with Cmd+K. Copy a skill into .kiro/skills/ or .agents/skills/ and both editors pick it up. The free SKILL.md generator turns a prompt you reuse into a skill folder.