Inline Edit with Cmd/Ctrl+K
Use inline edit when the selection is the task boundary.
Use the right surface
After this you can pick Inline edit for the right job and define done.
Done means a selected region is rewritten without inviting broader repository edits.
Fast edits still need a boundary: accept the useful completion, then review the patch.
Use Inline edit when you know exactly which code should change. 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
- ⌘CtrlK on selected code
- Source
- Cursor inline edit help 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 a selected region is rewritten without inviting broader repository edits.
Self-check
QWhen should you reach for Inline edit?
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.
- 1Select the smallest region that fully defines the change.
- 2Write the instruction as an edit, not a conversation.
- 3Compare the proposed patch against your selected scope.
- 4Escalate to Agent only when the fix requires files outside the selection.
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.
The rewrite preserves behavior not named in the prompt.
Takeaway. Stop when you have proof: The selected boundary was respected..
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?