Introduction
In the world of software development, tools that enhance productivity are invaluable. Recently, I explored the capabilities of three major code assistance tools—Cursor, Copilot, and Codex—by setting up an MCP server for Azure DevOps using Visual Studio Code. This article shares my experiences, highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of each tool.
Initial Setup Challenges
My journey began with an attempt to configure MCP for Azure DevOps. I encountered an unintuitive npm package error that proved challenging to resolve. Despite searching through Stack Overflow and Google, I found little helpful information.
Trying Cursor
Frustrated, I turned to Cursor. Upon encountering the same npm error, I asked Cursor for assistance. Remarkably, it identified that the npm cache was broken and corrected the issue, allowing me to proceed with the MCP setup successfully.
Querying Work Items
With the MCP now functional, I queried how many work items I had. Cursor responded in approximately ten seconds, confirming that I had no items—an accurate assessment.
Using Copilot
Next, I switched to Visual Studio Code with Copilot. I repeated the same work item query. Copilot provided the correct answer, taking perhaps a second longer than Cursor. The tool performed well, demonstrating efficiency in responding to straightforward queries.
Disappointment with Codex
Finally, I attempted the same query using Codex. My experience was less than satisfactory. Codex initially attempted to run the MCP command but ultimately failed, claiming it was sandboxed. This limitation led to a series of attempts that Codex tried to fulfill the job.
All roads lead to Rome…
It explored various solutions, including installing the Azure DevOps tools for PowerShell and executing scripts. Finally Codex took about ten minutes to conclude that I had no work items (not even using the MCP server) which was disappointing given the efficiency of the other tools. The impressive part was the endurance and the various numbers of workarounds that Codex found to get the job done…
Key Takeaways
The comparison of these three tools revealed distinct differences in functionality and efficiency:
- Cursor: Quick to resolve issues and efficient in responding to queries.
- Copilot: Reliable and fast, offering accurate information with minimal delay.
- Codex: Limited in functionality due to sandboxing issues, leading to delays and a huge variety of workarounds.
Finally…
The experiences shared here reflect my personal interactions with Cursor, Copilot, and Codex in a specific context. While both Cursor and Copilot performed admirably, Codex left much to be desired. For developers seeking reliable code assistance in Azure DevOps, these insights can help guide tool selection.
If you have insights or experiences with these tools, feel free to connect with me on LinkedIn or explore related categories.
Note: This content was generated with the help of AI but has been thoroughly reviewed for accuracy and clarity.
