Update (May 20, 2026): Google has released Antigravity 2.0 at I/O 2026 — a full rebuild with a new Go-based CLI, SDK for custom agents, and Gemini 3.5 Flash as the default model (289 tok/s, 4x faster). The review below covers Antigravity v1. Many of the issues I noted (slow iteration, model limitations) may be addressed in 2.0. I’ll publish a new “I Used Antigravity 2.0 for a Week” review soon.

---

Week 13 of my “I Used It for a Week” series. After terminal tools (Aider, OpenCode), IDE extensions (Copilot, Windsurf), and app generators (Bolt.new, v0) — this week I tested the tool that claims to make all of them obsolete.

Google Antigravity launched in late 2025 alongside Gemini 3, and the developer community is deeply divided. Half call it the future of coding. The other half call it a “$20 paperweight.” After a week of real use, I understand both sides.

What Antigravity Actually Is

Antigravity is not a VS Code extension. It’s not a chatbot sidebar. It’s a full IDE — a VS Code fork — where AI agents don’t suggest code, they execute it. The difference is like GPS giving directions versus a self-driving car.

You describe a task. Antigravity’s “Manager” breaks it into subtasks. Multiple agents work simultaneously — one writes code in the editor, another runs commands in the terminal, a third opens a browser to test the result. You watch it all happen in real-time.

It ships with Gemini 3.1 Pro as the default model, but also supports Claude Sonnet 4.5 and GPT-compatible models.

Day 1: The Demo Moment

I asked it to “build a full-stack task manager with real-time sync and authentication.”

What happened next was genuinely surreal. Antigravity planned the architecture, created the file structure, wrote the React frontend, built the Express backend, set up a SQLite database, added Google OAuth, implemented WebSocket sync, and opened a browser to test it — all while I watched. It even recorded a video of the test run as proof.

The whole thing took about 8 minutes. The app worked. I could log in, create tasks, and see them sync across two browser tabs in real-time.

If you’ve never seen an agent-first IDE work, this is the moment that sells you.

Day 2-3: Real Project Work

The demo magic fades when you point Antigravity at an existing codebase. I opened a mid-size Next.js project (~50 files) and asked it to “add a notification system with email and in-app alerts.”

Antigravity planned the feature well — it identified the right files to modify, proposed a reasonable architecture, and started implementing. But it made assumptions about my database schema that were wrong, chose a notification library I’d never heard of, and the email integration used hardcoded SMTP credentials.

When I corrected it, the agent loop got confused. It reverted changes it shouldn’t have, re-introduced a bug it had already fixed, and eventually I had to manually intervene. The autonomous loop is powerful when it works and frustrating when it doesn’t.

What Blew Me Away

Multi-agent coordination

Watching three agents work simultaneously — editor, terminal, browser — is unlike anything else in this series. When the code agent writes a component, the terminal agent runs the dev server, and the browser agent checks if it renders correctly. It’s the closest thing to having a junior developer pair.

The Manager surface

Antigravity’s “Manager” is a mission control panel that shows you what each agent is doing, what’s planned, and what’s completed. You can intervene at any point — approve a plan before execution, reject a file change, or redirect the agents. It’s the right level of human-in-the-loop.

Greenfield projects

For new projects with no existing code, Antigravity is the fastest path from idea to working app. Faster than Bolt.new (because it runs locally with real infrastructure), faster than Cursor (because it’s autonomous), faster than anything else I’ve tested.

What Frustrated Me

Existing codebases

Antigravity struggles with established projects that have their own patterns, conventions, and architectural decisions. It doesn’t read your team’s coding standards — it imposes its own. For greenfield work, this is fine. For a codebase with 2 years of history, it’s a problem.

Token consumption

The multi-agent architecture burns through tokens fast. A complex task can use $5-10 in API costs in a single session. The free tier includes Gemini 3 Pro credits, but heavy users will hit limits quickly. The paid tier ($20/month) helps but doesn’t eliminate the cost.

Google ecosystem assumptions

Antigravity defaults to Google services — Firebase for auth, Cloud Run for deployment, Gemini for the model. You can change these, but the defaults push you toward Google’s stack. If you’re an AWS or Vercel shop, expect friction.

Stability

It’s a new product and it shows. I experienced two crashes during the week, one session where the agents got stuck in a loop, and occasional UI glitches. Nothing data-destroying, but not production-stable either.

Antigravity vs Cursor vs Devin

Feature	Antigravity	Cursor	Devin
Type	Agent-first IDE	AI-enhanced IDE	Autonomous agent
Autonomy	High (multi-agent)	Low (suggestions + chat)	Highest (fully autonomous)
Existing codebases	⚠️ Struggles	✅ Good	⚠️ Struggles
New projects	✅ Best	✅ Good	✅ Good
Cost	Free tier + $20/mo	$20/mo	$500/mo
Stability	⚠️ Early	✅ Mature	⚠️ Early
Best for	Rapid prototyping	Daily coding	Delegated tasks

My Verdict After 7 Days

Antigravity is the most ambitious AI coding tool I’ve tested. When it works — and for greenfield projects, it usually does — it’s genuinely magical. The multi-agent coordination is a glimpse of where all coding tools are heading.

But ambition and reliability are different things. For my daily work on existing codebases, I’d still reach for Cursor or Aider. For starting a new project from scratch, Antigravity is now my first choice.

Best for: Rapid prototyping, hackathons, starting new projects, developers in the Google ecosystem.

Not for: Working on established codebases, teams that need stability, developers who want fine-grained control.

Rating: 7.5/10 — The most impressive demo in AI coding. The most frustrating tool when the demo breaks. Check back in 6 months — this could be a 9.

FAQ

Is Antigravity worth trying?

For greenfield projects and rapid prototyping, absolutely — the multi-agent coordination that plans, codes, tests, and deploys simultaneously is unlike anything else available. The free tier includes Gemini 3 Pro credits to evaluate it. For existing codebases, it struggles with established patterns, so Cursor or Aider are better choices there.

Is Antigravity better than Cursor?

They’re fundamentally different tools. Antigravity is agent-first — multiple AI agents work autonomously on your behalf, which is faster for new projects but less reliable on existing codebases. Cursor is an AI-enhanced editor where you stay in control, with superior Tab completions and more mature multi-file editing. Cursor is better for daily coding; Antigravity is better for building something from scratch.

Is Antigravity free?

Antigravity has a free tier that includes Gemini 3 Pro credits, enough to test the multi-agent workflow on a few projects. The paid tier at $20/month adds more credits and premium model access. Heavy agent usage can burn through tokens fast ($5-10 per complex session), so monitor your usage during the trial.

Next week: I Used Continue.dev for a Week — the open-source “bring your own model” alternative to GitHub Copilot.