Where Cursor still struggles with web design
After several months of using Cursor almost every day to build client websites, the hard part is not getting usable code. The work includes small business sites, sales pages, redesigns, and portfolio sites. The setup already includes project rules, reusable site parts, written notes, favorite examples, and stored company knowledge, so each job does not start from nothing.
The current design workflow is to capture of a liked site or app, ask Cursor to keep the same visual style, and adapt it to the new project. Cursor can sometimes get close, but often misses the small visual details that make a page feel polished: spacing, type choices, visual priority, buttons, proportions, and overall feel. The result becomes a long back-and-forth with prompts about adding more empty space, fixing the first screen, making buttons less generic, reducing noise, and moving closer to the reference.
The final result can be acceptable, but it takes more rounds than expected. Cursor also seems weak at judging its own screen design.
Key points
- Cursor can produce workable code for client websites, but design quality is still the .
- A prepared setup with rules, reusable parts, notes, references, and company knowledge does not solve visual polish by itself.
- help, but Cursor often misses spacing, type choices, buttons, proportions, and overall feel.
- Getting the desired result can require many small revision prompts.
- Cursor seems limited at judging whether its own screen design looks good.