Indexing and Search
Context quality starts before the prompt reaches the model.
Use the right surface
After this you can pick Indexing and search for the right job and define done.
Done means you can decide when to trust semantic search and when exact search is safer.
Better answers come from smaller, explicit context: files, docs, terminal output and evidence.
Use Indexing and search when you need Cursor to reason over code beyond the open file. 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
- Codebase index, semantic search and exact search tools
- Source
- Search tools, context and indexing 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 decide when to trust semantic search and when exact search is safer.
Self-check
QWhen should you reach for Indexing and search?
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.
- 1Check index status before asking broad repository questions.
- 2Use semantic search for concepts and exact search for names, strings or APIs.
- 3Ask Cursor to show the files it used for the answer.
- 4Re-index or narrow the query when results look stale or generic.
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.
Exact terms appear where the answer says they do.
Takeaway. Stop when you have proof: The answer cites relevant files rather than only the open file..
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?