Worktrees, Sandbox, Sudo and Command Approval
Shell power belongs behind explicit boundaries.
Use the right surface
After this you can pick CLI safety controls for the right job and define done.
Done means you can isolate changes and control risky commands.
The same agent loop can run in a terminal, script, CI job or SDK-backed internal tool.
Use CLI safety controls when the CLI may edit files or run commands with real side effects. 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
- --worktree, sandbox settings, sudo prompts and command approvals
- Source
- CLI overview and usage docs
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 isolate changes and control risky commands.
Self-check
QWhen should you reach for CLI safety controls?
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.
- 1Use worktrees when parallel or risky edits need isolation.
- 2Set sandbox behavior according to command risk.
- 3Approve commands based on effect, not familiarity.
- 4Review diffs before applying changes back.
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.
Risky commands wait for approval.
Takeaway. Stop when you have proof: The worktree contains the intended branch and files..
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?