What needs improvement with Windsurf?

Room for improvement is actually associated with every AI that exists. One thing is that if there is a very large codebase, such as a legacy codebase, sometimes the context window is a hindrance. There is a particular context window for every model, and for Windsurf in particular, if it is a very large legacy codebase, then you might have to pull in all of that code and only then maybe you will get the whole context. For very large projects, getting the context together intact is one thing that needs improvement. Another thing that I feel needs to be improved is hallucination. Whenever the context is not set, AI occasionally needs validation. It is always recommended that human reviews are also required when Windsurf generates code. You need to review it always. Performance with large indexing operations or when using very large models and efficient models such as Claude Opus takes a lot of time. There is nothing much that can be done about it as it is all about the model, but sometimes large indexing operations do take time. One more improvement that I feel is about documentation. There are a few other features I have not mentioned so far. There is one more feature called MCP, which is Model Context Protocol, present inside Windsurf. Instead of just chatting and asking it to generate code, I can use MCP to integrate it with external tools, whether it is Splunk, Veracode, or SonarQube. I can integrate it with all the external tools as well as internal tools and documentation, and it will do the work for me. It is not just that it will search in public and get details, which sometimes may hallucinate. MCP is one thing, and for advanced features such as MCP and workflows, sometimes I feel that documentation is not in detail. Windsurf could have better documentation for MCPs and workflows, and there are other niche and specific features that are present only in Windsurf.

The main improvements I would suggest for Windsurf are stronger context handling for bigger projects and a bit more control over the code it generates. This would make it even smoother and faster for our agency work. I would also appreciate a cleaner UI for larger projects, especially when there are many files and moving parts. That would be a valuable addition. Better integrations with our existing tools would help too, so we can move between coding, testing, and deployment more smoothly. Overall, these improvements would make it even better for agency-style work where speed and clarity matter the most. Regarding Windsurf's AI capabilities, it seems solid for general use, but because we work on client projects, we stay cautious with sensitive information. More visibility into security controls, permissions, and data handling would make it even better for us. It is adequate for our current needs, but stronger governance controls and clearer security options would be beneficial. Beyond what we have discussed, a small improvement would be more consistency in the output on complex prompts and better context retention across longer tasks.

I see an option for improvement regarding the platform that Windsurf is developed on, which is VS Code. We have projects in different technologies and languages, so if Windsurf can smoothly support running Java code, Spring Boot microservices, or enhance debugging capabilities, then it will be a one-stop shop for everything. From a usability perspective, Windsurf should be more user-friendly. When code gets generated, I see room for improvement in copying, looking at old queries or prompts, and copying the output from the cascade window to other codebases.

I think Windsurf could be improved. Honestly, I see it as super competitive today with the vast majority of AI IDEs out there. It would be great, even though it already has the models, to be able to include Claude Code at the console level, which I think would be really cool.

Windsurf has become less of a tool and more of a core part of how I build. I do not think in terms of writing code line by line anymore; I think in terms of features, flows, and systems, and Windsurf helped me translate that into actual implementation across the codebase. It fits especially well when I am doing rapid prototyping, exploring new ideas or architectures, or iterating on existing features quickly. At the same time, one thing I have noticed in my workflow is around model switching. When I switch between models, the GPT generating agent models sometimes the deeper context regarding decision reasoning or intermediate steps does not fully carry over, so I end up re-establishing context manually every time. It is so much painfully manual; that is not a blocker, but since I work on fairly complex multi-step systems, having strong cross-model memory consistency would make it even more powerful. One thing I would really appreciate is stronger cross-model memory and context continuity. Right now, when I switch between models, the surface-level context is there, but the deeper reasoning regarding why certain decisions were made or how a flow evolved does not always carry over fully. Since I work on complex and multi-step agents, I end up re-establishing the context manually. If Windsurf could maintain a kind of shared memory layer across models where intent, decisions, and intermediate steps persist, it would make the whole experience much more seamless. Improving the memory continuity and control would take it from powerful to extremely reliable at scale. Overall, Windsurf is already a strong tool, but there are a few areas where improvements would make a big difference, especially for advanced workflows. The first is cross-model memory and context continuity. The second is better control over agent execution. Right now, when switching between models—for instance, if I am using a tier of models and then I reach a limit, and then I need to switch to a lesser limit model—the high-level context is there, but deeper reasoning is lost. A shared memory layer across models would make the experience much more seamless. Furthermore, while Cascade is powerful, for larger changes, it would help to have more visibility or control, such as previewing the execution plan and guiding steps before it runs. The UI and documentation provided are pretty good, though I think there is room for true visibility and feedback during agent execution. While the amount of time put into the design and documentation is great, figuring out things with the documentation can often be done without any third-party help. Some advanced use cases are not fully explored in the documentation, but the best practices for using agents effectively are very clear, such as how to structure prompts for multi-file changes and how to guide Cascade for better outputs. Real-world advanced examples are already implemented in there; that could be very helpful for us. The main advice I would give to others looking into using Windsurf is to not use it as a traditional code assistant. Windsurf really shines when you treat it as a feature-level or system-level tool, not just something for autocomplete or small snippets. So instead of thinking "write this function," think more toward "build this flow." Learn how to guide it properly. That is the main thing I would advise: learn how to guide it properly, how to prompt it properly, and start with real use cases, not toy examples.

Overall, Windsurf is a powerful tool, but one key area is the accuracy and consistency of suggestions. While it is very helpful, sometimes the generated code or fixes need manual validation, especially for complex or production-level logic. Another improvement would be better control over AI actions, especially in agent workflows like Cascade. More transparency and fine-grained control would help developers trust and use it more confidently in critical tasks. Performance can be improved slightly. One area for improvement is around context limits and memory handling. Sometimes when working on very large codebases or long sessions, the context can feel limited. Improving how it retains and prioritizes context would make suggestions even more accurate. Another area is documentation and onboarding guidance. Since Windsurf is a relatively new tool, having more structured documentation, best practices, and real-world examples would help teams adopt it faster. Additionally, enterprise-level controls could be enhanced, such as better security, audit logs, and usage tracking. One additional area for improvement is offline and limited connectivity support. Since Windsurf relies heavily on AI capabilities, having a more robust fallback or partial offline functionality would be useful in restricted environments. Another point is the customization of AI behavior. It would be great to have more control over how the AI responds, such as tuning it for specific coding standards, project styles, or team preferences. Additionally, integration with more developer tools and ecosystems could be expanded. While it already fits well into the workflow, deeper integrations with CI/CD pipelines, issue tracking, and monitoring tools would make it more powerful.

Windsurf can improve its analytical solutions and inbuilt features, as I currently have a dependency on external third-party tools that could be introduced into Windsurf itself to reduce that time or dependency. The only improvement needed for Windsurf is to reduce dependency on third-party tools.

I feel that Windsurf can be improved, as sometimes it keeps giving the same answer again and again, which makes me feel stuck at those points in time, because it is giving the same answer in a loop. I think they should definitely improve Windsurf. My advice to others looking into using Windsurf is to work on your prompt skills, and if it gives the same answer again and again, try a new chat. I have never had a chance to talk to Windsurf's customer support, as I never had any complaint about that.

There should be an auto model feature just like Cursor. Cursor provides an auto model feature that detects your task and chooses the best model for your task accordingly. This is cost-saving compared to using the highest cost model and will help to achieve better accuracy. There should be an option where Windsurf should be able to connect to different integrated platforms such as Slack in a very easy way. If I want to build a feature, then I can simply type on my Slack and the feature should be ready. This way we can ensure that more and more features are built and Windsurf can simply return the pull request of the particular feature. A proper streaming should exist between Slack and Windsurf or any other channel. Windsurf can be improved by introducing a plan method in which the user is asked all the necessary questions and a proper plan is generated with user metrics provided. Sometimes, Windsurf is not able to develop the feature that we want and hallucinates a lot. The hallucination should be very much less compared to now as the models are evolving day by day. Windsurf should evolve in such a way that it should take custom prompting. It should ensure that an agent.md file is already present in the code base where the user can write how the agent should work, how the agent should react, and what it was explicitly trained for. This way, there will be much less hallucination and more code generation with better quality, and Windsurf will work according to user requirements. There should be a proper markdown folder specifically designed in Windsurf for each product. I would like to suggest that there should be one more feature that I am not able to use. Currently, I am not able to work on two repositories at a single time. Suppose I want to develop a feature that requires changes in both my frontend and backend. Windsurf lags in this scenario. It can only have access to the backend or it can only have access to the frontend and not both. If this feature comes, then Windsurf will be top in the market.

Windsurf sometimes exhibits hallucination behavior. I encountered a use case recently where I wanted my code blocks in black color. When I asked a question, Windsurf did not identify the exact problem but directly edited the CSS file to implement the black color feature. However, I discovered that the black color could be applied through the theme feature instead. From an accuracy perspective, Windsurf sometimes hallucinates and deviates from the expected results. If there are improvements needed for Windsurf, one possibility would be to connect Windsurf to Slack channels so the context can be improved.

Windsurf can be improved with some sort of multi-agent orchestration at times and an easier way to add MCPs, as well as an easier way for it to use the browser without me mentioning it. Windsurf should definitely improve on the retrieval coverage side and multi-agent side, which Cloud Code and others have.

Windsurf can be improved in several ways, such as enhancing response times and better handling of massive codebases when dealing with over 100K plus files, along with improved security controls. AI accuracy can be improved.

I would like to add that Windsurf is very good and fits well into my workflow, but I would prefer if the cascade agent of Windsurf could be a little better. Recently, I used the agent for an Angular upgrade from version 14 to 21, but it got stuck and did not provide a good response. I want the Windsurf cascade agent to improve in solving complex problems that occur throughout my entire repository. I have many points for improvement, particularly regarding the cascade agent. It often fails to understand the latest Angular repo, not interacting with files like my Angular JSON, tsconfig, or package.json unless prompted. I want the cascade to be more predictable and wish for improvements in the agent to handle complex tasks more effectively. Enhancing the reliability of the cascade agent for large and complex codebases, ensuring it understands projects thoroughly, and providing safer multi-file edits would make Windsurf a significantly stronger tool.

I have no suggestions at the moment for how Windsurf can be improved. I would not add more about the needed improvements, even small things that could make my experience better.

I don't think of any improvements for Windsurf right now. If Windsurf could come and build with all these connections to different clean services, that would be helpful.

What they can do further and venture into next is to provide a CLI environment, similar to the command-line interface environment that Cursor offers. It allows for running a cursor agent from the command line to make changes, review pull requests, or access certain other capabilities. These capabilities are currently not in Windsurf. Windsurf focuses on the productivity and the ID/editor part. I would rather look for the inclusion of pull request reviews or a kind of a TRD or technical requirement general documentation generation, or system diagram generation directly from the codebase in Windsurf itself. These should be the next obvious features they launch for developers. In our team, there are certain people who use Windsurf regularly and appreciate using it. However, it is not a collaborative tool where someone is going to use the same tool and interact in the same IDE. Everyone does their local development, pushes it to different Git branches, someone reviews the PR, and then merges the branch. It is very localized in that sense.