Skip to main content
RapidDev - Software Development Agency
cursor-tutorial

How to review Cursor-generated code

Cursor generates code fast but reviewing it thoroughly is essential before committing. This tutorial shows a structured PR review workflow using Cursor's built-in diff view, git integration, and @git context to review AI-generated changes efficiently. You will learn what to check, how to spot common AI mistakes, and how to use Cursor itself to review its own output.

What you'll learn

  • How to use Cursor's diff view to review AI-generated changes
  • What to check in AI-generated code before committing
  • How to use @git context to review changes
  • How to create a pre-commit review checklist
Book a free consultation
4.9Clutch rating
600+Happy partners
17+Countries served
190+Team members
Beginner6 min read10-15 minCursor Free+, Git-based projectsLast updated March 2026RapidDev Engineering Team
TL;DR

Cursor generates code fast but reviewing it thoroughly is essential before committing. This tutorial shows a structured PR review workflow using Cursor's built-in diff view, git integration, and @git context to review AI-generated changes efficiently. You will learn what to check, how to spot common AI mistakes, and how to use Cursor itself to review its own output.

Quick facts about this guide
FactValue
ToolCursor
DifficultyBeginner
Time required10-15 min
CompatibilityCursor Free+, Git-based projects
Last updatedMarch 2026

Reviewing Cursor-generated code before committing

AI-generated code passes casual review easily but often contains subtle issues: hallucinated imports, incomplete error handling, security vulnerabilities, and logic bugs. This tutorial establishes a review workflow that catches these issues before they reach your codebase.

Prerequisites

  • Cursor installed with Git initialized
  • Code generated by Cursor that needs review
  • Familiarity with git diff and Cursor's diff view

Step-by-step guide

1

Review the diff before accepting

After Cursor generates code in Composer or Cmd+K, always review the diff before clicking Accept. Look for red lines (deletions) that should not have been removed and green lines (additions) that introduce unexpected patterns.

Cursor diff review
1// In Cursor's diff view, check for:
2// 1. RED LINES: Code that was deleted but should not have been
3// - Existing error handling removed
4// - Comments or documentation stripped
5// - Working code replaced entirely
6// 2. GREEN LINES: New code that looks suspicious
7// - Hardcoded values (URLs, credentials, magic numbers)
8// - Missing error handling (no try/catch on async)
9// - Imports from packages not in your package.json
10// - console.log statements left in production code

Expected result: A mental checklist for quickly scanning AI-generated diffs.

2

Use @git to review all changes at once

After accepting multiple Cursor changes, use @git in Chat to get a summary of everything that changed. This catches issues across multiple files that single-file diffs might miss.

Cursor Chat prompt
1// Cursor Chat prompt (Cmd+L, Ask mode):
2// @git Review all uncommitted changes. For each modified
3// file, check for:
4// 1. Missing error handling
5// 2. Hardcoded values that should use config
6// 3. Imports that reference non-existent modules
7// 4. Security issues (SQL injection, XSS, exposed secrets)
8// 5. Functions without return types
9// 6. Dead code or unused imports
10// Report issues by file with severity (High/Medium/Low).

Expected result: A structured review of all AI-generated changes with categorized issues.

3

Create a pre-commit review checklist

Store a review checklist as a Cursor Notepad or custom command that you run before every commit. This standardizes the review process.

.cursor/rules/review-checklist.mdc
1---
2description: Pre-commit review checklist
3globs: ""
4alwaysApply: false
5---
6
7## Pre-Commit Review Checklist for AI Code
8Before committing, verify:
9
10### Correctness
11- [ ] All imports resolve to existing modules
12- [ ] Return types match the function contract
13- [ ] Edge cases handled (null, empty array, zero)
14- [ ] Async functions have try/catch or .catch()
15
16### Security
17- [ ] No hardcoded secrets, URLs, or API keys
18- [ ] SQL queries use parameterized statements
19- [ ] User input is validated/sanitized
20- [ ] No eval() or innerHTML with user data
21
22### Quality
23- [ ] No console.log in production code
24- [ ] No unused variables or imports
25- [ ] Function names match their behavior
26- [ ] Comments are accurate (not stale)

Expected result: A reusable checklist that standardizes code review for AI-generated output.

4

Use BugBot for automated review

If you have Cursor Pro+, enable BugBot to automatically scan changes on feature branches. BugBot compares against main and flags potential bugs with confidence ratings.

BugBot workflow
1// BugBot automatically reviews when you push to a branch.
2// To manually trigger a review in Cursor:
3// 1. Commit your changes to a feature branch
4// 2. Push to remote: git push origin feature-branch
5// 3. BugBot scans the diff against main
6// 4. Issues appear with confidence ratings
7// 5. Click 'Fix in Cursor' for one-click fixes
8//
9// BugBot Autofix has a 35%+ merge rate — it can
10// fix many issues automatically.

Expected result: Automated AI review catching issues before human PR review.

5

Do a final manual sanity check

After automated checks, do a quick manual review of the actual behavior. Run the code, check the UI, test the API endpoint. AI-generated code can be syntactically perfect but logically wrong.

Terminal
1// Quick sanity checks:
2// 1. Does the code compile? npx tsc --noEmit
3// 2. Do tests pass? npm test
4// 3. Does it work in the browser/API?
5// 4. Does the git diff look reasonable for the task?
6// (small task = small diff, big diff = suspicious)
7
8// If the diff is unexpectedly large:
9// Cursor Chat: @git Why are there changes in 15 files
10// when I only asked to update the UserProfile component?
11// List all files that changed and explain each change.

Expected result: Code compiles, tests pass, and the actual behavior matches the intended change.

Complete working example

.cursor/commands/review.md
1---
2description: Review all AI-generated changes before commit
3---
4
5Review all uncommitted changes in this project:
6
71. List every modified and new file
82. For each file, check:
9 - All imports resolve to existing modules in package.json or src/
10 - All async functions have error handling
11 - No hardcoded secrets, URLs, or credentials
12 - No console.log statements in production code
13 - All functions have explicit TypeScript return types
14 - No unused variables or dead code
153. Check for cross-file issues:
16 - Circular imports between modified files
17 - Inconsistent naming between related files
18 - Missing exports that other files depend on
194. Rate each issue as High/Medium/Low severity
205. Provide a one-line summary: PASS or NEEDS FIXES
21
22Use @git for the diff context.

Common mistakes when reviewing Cursor-generated code

Why it's a problem: Accepting Cursor changes without reviewing the diff

How to avoid: Always review the diff in Cursor's panel before clicking Accept. Check red lines (deletions) first.

Why it's a problem: Only reviewing the files you asked Cursor to change

How to avoid: Use @git to review ALL uncommitted changes, not just the files you expected to change.

Why it's a problem: Trusting that AI-generated code compiles equals correct

How to avoid: Run tests and manually verify behavior after every Cursor session before committing.

Best practices

  • Review every diff before accepting Cursor changes
  • Use @git context to review all changes across files
  • Check for deletions first (red lines) as they often indicate unintended removals
  • Run the TypeScript compiler and test suite before committing
  • Create a /review custom command for standardized AI code review
  • Enable BugBot for automated review on feature branches
  • Keep commits small and review after each Cursor task, not after multiple tasks

Still stuck?

Copy one of these prompts to get a personalized, step-by-step explanation.

ChatGPT Prompt

Create a code review checklist specifically for AI-generated code. Include checks for: hallucinated imports, missing error handling, hardcoded secrets, unused variables, incorrect types, security vulnerabilities (SQL injection, XSS), and logic errors. Format as a markdown checklist.

Cursor Prompt

In Cursor Chat (Cmd+L): @git Review all uncommitted changes. Check for: missing error handling, hardcoded values, hallucinated imports, security issues, and unused code. Rate each issue High/Medium/Low. Provide a PASS/NEEDS FIXES verdict.

Frequently asked questions

How long should I spend reviewing AI-generated code?

At minimum 30 seconds per file for a diff scan. For security-sensitive code (auth, payments, data access), spend 2-5 minutes per file. The review time should be proportional to the risk.

Can Cursor review its own code?

Yes. Using @git in Ask mode to review changes works surprisingly well. Cursor catches issues like missing error handling and hallucinated imports in its own output.

Should I review AI code differently than human code?

Yes. AI code is more likely to have: hallucinated imports, removed existing logic, hardcoded values, and missing edge case handling. Focus your review on these patterns.

What percentage of AI-generated code needs changes?

In practice, about 20-30% of Cursor-generated code needs minor adjustments. Major issues occur in roughly 5-10% of generations. The review workflow catches both.

Is there a way to automate the review?

BugBot provides automated review on branches. You can also create a .cursor/commands/review.md custom command that runs a standardized review prompt with one slash command.

RapidDev

Talk to an Expert

Our team has built 600+ apps. Get personalized help with your project.

Book a free consultation
Matt Graham

Written by

Matt Graham · CEO & Founder, RapidDev

1,000+ client projects delivered. Columbia University & Harvard Business School alumnus, U.S. Navy veteran. About the author →

Learning is great. Shipping is faster with help.

Our engineers have built 600+ apps on Cursor and the tools around it. If your project needs to be live sooner than your learning curve allows — book a free consultation.

Book a free consultation

We put the rapid in RapidDev

Need a dedicated strategic tech and growth partner? Discover what RapidDev can do for your business! Book a call with our team to schedule a free, no-obligation consultation. We'll discuss your project and provide a custom quote at no cost.