The community submitted 15 reviews to tell
us what they like about Google Antigravity, what Google Antigravity can do better, and
more.
4.8
Based on 15 reviews
Review Google Antigravity?
Reviewers describe Google Antigravity as a strong productivity tool that is easy to use, fast, and especially good at explaining code, planning implementations, and helping people explore ideas or handle complex tasks. Users also say it works well for mockups, infrastructure and API work, and broader workflows, though some prefer single-task use over its agent manager. The main complaints are minor UI bugs, rough polish, weaker handling of larger multi-file projects, and occasional limits or model fallback. Founders from Socra and Dropy also praise its parallel agents for feature design and backend work.
+12
Summarized with AI
AppSignalGet the APM insights you need without enterprise price tags.
For a very long time I had all these ideas that I couldn't act on. Antigravity has allowed me to just explore and create again, which is a wonderful feeling. The recent addition of skills has exploded my workflow productivity, it literally handles my inbox and calendar for me now. I've been a Google fanboy for a long time and I love what they're doing here.
What needs improvement
Still has some minor UI quirks and small bugs as expected with a new tool, but nothing that stops the workflow. I’m excited to see more built-in skills added.
vs Alternatives
I’ve used Cursor and Claude Code extensively, but they always felt like advanced autocomplete. I chose Antigravity because it bridges the gap between "writing code" and "getting things done." The autonomous skills, handling my real-world emails, calendar, and project setup, along with the deep planning it applies to project architecture, make it the only tool that actually feels like a teammate instead of just a text editor.
Some UI quirks and minor bugs, but very powerful overall. I really like how it handles implementation plans and walkthroughs. I think it will be great a couple months from now.
What needs improvement
Mostly needs some bugfixes and UI polish. E.g. sometimes one of the panels obscures an Accept/Reject button, so it's hard to see the app is waiting for user input. And when allowing certain commands, I haven't been able to make this stick yet. There's an allowlist for commands in the settings, but this doesn't seem to work for me.
Cursor never quite resonated with me, but I need to give it another shot. Claude Code is great with Opus 4.5, but way too expensive. Antigravity is very close to Claude Code, and as a paid Google AI Pro subscriber I haven't bumped into any limits yet. I actually like Copilot quite a bit as well.
I tried AntiGravity and am very satisfied, as it allowed me to be highly productive and tackle complex tasks efficiently. I am also very grateful to the team for making this possible, and I’m excited for future updates and what’s to come. 😊
What needs improvement
I think the biggest potential for improvement probably lies in enhancing the Agents. I’m not currently using the Agent Manager (CTRL + E), because, to be honest, I usually handle one task at a time, as the tasks are very complex and need to be reviewed and understood by me.
For a non tech BA / PM, Google Antigravity is extremely helpful to draft ideas, interactive mockup. I find it easy to use and the generating time is fast.
The agent workflow seemed like a meaningful improvement over Cursor. It was easy to follow the agent's code exploration and "though process". The review workflow made it feel very natural to iterate on the agent's proposed solution.
What needs improvement
The onboarding/trial felt weak somehow. I ran out of free-usage fairly quickly, and it fell over onto weaker models. I wasn't prompted to upgrade. For a new product, I'd expect to be able to trial it fully-featured, and then decide whether to upgrade.
There were some UI bugs, but nothing I couldn't live with for a new product.
The most important thing is going to be model accuracy. It's worth giving up on UX for better code generation.
In that sense, I actually stalled. Antigravity had momentum, but then stalled and failed over to weaker models. I had to get back to work, so I switched back to Cursor + Claude Code.
The ability to run multiple coding agents simultaneously significantly accelerated our development cycle, helping us handle complex logic in the extension's backend with much higher efficiency.
Google Antigravity deserves a massive shoutout. I’ve been an AI-accelerated developer since GitHub Copilot launched, but this… this feels like another level. It just gets what I’m trying to build. The speed, the quality, the intuition — I genuinely haven’t had a better experience anywhere else. Without Antigravity, LaunchShots wouldn’t have shipped this fast.