All platforms
Migrate off Cursor

Off Cursor. Onto production.

Cursor builds incredibly fast, but AI-generated codebases often suffer from file bloat, duplicated logic, and 'spaghetti' component trees. Our job is to take the prototype that proved the concept and apply rigorous engineering discipline so it can scale with a real team.

Why clients move off Cursor

The structural reasons.

  • Codebase lacks architectural structure

  • No test coverage for critical paths

  • Component duplication makes styling inconsistent

Where we land you

Target stack. Defaults, not dogma.

These are the choices we'd recommend for most Cursor migrations. The audit week is where we adjust for your specific constraints — compliance, team skills, existing infrastructure.

Repo
Monorepo (Turborepo)
Standardized conventions across packages
Code
Strict TypeScript
Removing 'any' types and generating schemas
Testing
Playwright + Jest
E2E and unit test coverage
Things that bite

Cursor gotchas. All known.

The patterns specific to Cursor that catch teams trying to migrate themselves. We've seen each of these enough times to plan for them up front.

Messy commit history

We usually squash and re-organize the history into logical milestones.

Unnecessary dependencies

AI often hallucinates packages or adds redundant libraries. We prune the package.json.

What's in scope

A typical Cursor migration.

Yours will land within a few items of this. The line-item quote from the audit is what makes it specific.

  • Full codebase audit and type-check enforcement
  • Restructure folders into atomic design patterns
  • Add comprehensive test suites

Ready to leave Cursor?

Audit week is where it gets specific. Five business days, fixed price, real plan.