Headless Scripts and Print Mode
Non-interactive agent work needs stronger trust boundaries.
Use the right surface
After this you can pick Headless CLI for the right job and define done.
Done means you can decide when headless mode is appropriate and how to constrain it.
The same agent loop can run in a terminal, script, CI job or SDK-backed internal tool.
Use Headless CLI when an automated script or CI job should call Cursor without an interactive UI. Keep the boundary narrow.
Start small. Name the job, attach the context that proves the point and decide what evidence would make the output trustworthy.
Read the loop before touching the controls. The first beat frames the work, the second uses Cursor, the third checks the result and the fourth leaves a handoff someone else can inspect.
Interactive diagram. Tab through its regions; each focused region shows its detail in the panel below.
Run this loop in a real repo.
- Entry point
- agent -p, output formats, stream-json, transcripts and admin headless controls
- Source
- CLI overview, headless docs and CLI changelog
Use the source as the product reference.
Ask Cursor for an output you can inspect.
If the output cannot be checked, narrow the task before you continue.
A good run leaves a file, setting, screenshot, command result or written claim you can verify.
Takeaway. Done means you can decide when headless mode is appropriate and how to constrain it.
Self-check
QWhen should you reach for Headless CLI?
Run it
After this you can do the task with clear scope and one proof point.
Treat this as a short practice loop, not a product tour. The task should be small enough that you can inspect the result without trusting the summary.
- 1Decide whether the job can safely run without prompts.
- 2Make input, allowed files and expected output explicit.
- 3Capture structured output and request IDs for review.
- 4Use admin controls where teams should disable headless usage.
The exercise is complete only when the proof matches the requested outcome. If the proof is weak, reduce the scope or fix the context instead of adding more instructions.
Keep the task small enough to review.
Output is machine-readable or reviewable.
Takeaway. Stop when you have proof: The script has a narrow working directory..
Self-check
QWhich habit makes this workflow safe to use on a real project?
Check it
After this you can find the first failed check before changing tools.
Verification decides the next move.
Interactive diagram. Tab through its regions; each focused region shows its detail in the panel below.
Pick a row to see what to look for.
Use the first failure signal as the next prompt. Broad retries usually make the run noisier; a narrow retry gives Cursor a concrete repair target.
No proof means more checking.
Use a real repo or admin setting. Save the prompt, context and proof.
Takeaway. If it fails, find the first failed check.
Self-check
QThe workflow failed. What is the best first move?