Google Antigravity

Run and monitor several coding agents at once in an IDE

4.6•5 reviews•

864 followers

Run and monitor several coding agents at once in an IDE

4.6•5 reviews•

864 followers

Visit website

AI Coding Agents

•

AI Code Editors

Google Antigravity - Build the new way

Google Antigravity Reviews

Name: Google Antigravity
Rating: 4.6 (5 reviews)

The community submitted 5 reviews to tell us what they like about Google Antigravity, what Google Antigravity can do better, and more.

4.6

Based on 5 reviews

Review Google Antigravity?

Reviews

All Reviews

Most Informative

Founder Reviews (3)

Other Reviews (2)

View all

Newsletter Apps About FAQ Terms Privacy & Cookies Privacy Choices Advertise llms.txtContact us: hello@producthunt.com

•2 reviews

What's great

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.

vs Alternatives

Because it integrates Gemini3 in a free tier.

Does it reliably pass tests before proposing code changes?

The agent always tests his own code and works until the test is passed.

How accurate is code generation for my primary language?

My primary language is TS. Very acccurate. Problem is not accuracy. It is making the best design choices.

Can agents run safely in restricted or air-gapped environments?

You can not the agent APIs without a network connection.

Ratings

Ease of use

Reliability

Value for money

Customization

Report

52 views1mo ago

•1 review

What's great

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.

vs Alternatives

Cursor

Github Copilot

Claude Code

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.

How accurate is code generation for my primary language?

Python code seems pretty solid, but it sometimes misses some minor things, so definitely still needs a thorough review.

How easy is async collaboration across teammates and branches?

Haven't tried; I'm a solo dev.

Did it reduce code review time and defect rates?

N/A

Ratings

Ease of use

Reliability

Value for money

Customization

Report

66 views27d ago

used this to build

Launch Shots

(291 points)

•3 reviews

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.

Report

14 views19d ago

Product Hunt

•3 reviews

What's great

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.

vs Alternatives

Cursor

Claude Code

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.

How transparent are agent plans and decision steps?

Extremely. And, the agent "thought process" is very discoverable.

How well does it handle large monorepos and workspaces?

It seemed to grok our moderate Rails monorepo pretty smoothly.

What guardrails prevent destructive terminal or repo actions?

There's a planning mode (default) that I think did a standard job at. I didn't notice any guardrails

What latency do you see between prompts and actions?

It felt very fast until I ran out of credits and decided to just stop working.

Ratings

Ease of use

Reliability

Value for money

Report

193 views1mo ago

Product Hunt

•3 reviews

What's great

What needs improvement

There were some UI bugs, but nothing I couldn't live with for a new product.

vs Alternatives

Cursor

Claude Code

How transparent are agent plans and decision steps?

Extremely. And, the agent "thought process" is very discoverable.

How well does it handle large monorepos and workspaces?

It seemed to grok our moderate Rails monorepo pretty smoothly.

What guardrails prevent destructive terminal or repo actions?

There's a planning mode (default) that I think did a standard job at. I didn't notice any guardrails

What latency do you see between prompts and actions?

It felt very fast until I ran out of credits and decided to just stop working.

Ratings

Ease of use

Reliability

Value for money

Report

193 views1mo ago