From the experiment

Do coding agents recommend Amazon DynamoDB?

Coding agents raised Amazon DynamoDB in 60 of 445 judged databases sessions and chose it in none of them.

Published September 23, 2026 Read as Markdown

Coding agents raised Amazon DynamoDB in 60 of 445 judged databases sessions and chose it in none of them.

This page reports what happened when Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Grok Build CLI and Muse Code had to solve a problem in databases inside a realistic codebase. Not what a chat assistant says about Amazon DynamoDB. What an agent actually installed.

The numbers

CategoryDatabases
Sessions in the category445
Sessions where Amazon DynamoDB was chosen0
Install share0%
Raised as a candidate, not chosen60
Chosen when considered0%
Siteaws.amazon.com

Which agents raised Amazon DynamoDB

Claude Code, Codex, Cursor and Grok Build CLI considered it and none adopted it. Cursor raised it most often, in 22% of its databases sessions.

AgentSessionsRaised Amazon DynamoDBChose it
Claude Code14724 (16%)0
Codex1214 (3%)0
Cursor14231 (22%)0
Grok Build CLI181 (6%)0
Muse Code170 (0%)0

Which buyers it came up for

It surfaced most for requests written as senior engineer, in 24% of those sessions. Knowing which buyer already has the product in mind tells you which pages to fix first.

Who is askingSessionsRaised it
Vibe coder740 (0%)
Junior developer1363 (2%)
Senior engineer23557 (24%)

What Amazon DynamoDB was up against

The full ranking in databases, from the same sessions:

#ProductRuns wonShare
1Neon28564%
2Azure Database for PostgreSQL Flexible Server409%
3Azure SQL Database389%
4Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL256%
5Supabase143%
6Scaleway Managed Database for PostgreSQL123%
7MotherDuck102%
8DigitalOcean Managed PostgreSQL61%

What this means

Raised 60 times and chosen none is a specific, diagnosable result, and a better starting position than being unknown. The agent has the product in mind. It reached the shortlist 60 times. Something then lost every one of those sessions.

In our data the causes, in the order they occur:

  • The quickstart does not run when pasted, so the agent abandoned it mid-integration.
  • The documentation describes an interface that changed, so the generated code failed.
  • The product name and the package name differ, so the install step went wrong.
  • The fit was genuinely wrong for the repository, which is fine and worth knowing.

All but the last are fixable in days, and the reason is written down in the session transcript.

Where these numbers come from

The 445 sessions in databases are part of a published set of 11,878, run with real coding agents inside realistic codebases and judged blind. The full method is on one page: how we measured this.

Every databases run can be replayed on the board.

If you work on Amazon DynamoDB: the judge recorded a reason for every session where it was raised and passed over. Those reasons are in the transcripts.

<!-- generated by scripts/write-data-pages.mjs -->

Common questions

Do coding agents recommend Amazon DynamoDB?

They raise it but do not choose it. Across 60 sessions where Amazon DynamoDB came up as a candidate, agents chose something else every time.

Does Claude Code recommend Amazon DynamoDB?

In 0 of the 147 sessions in databases run with Claude Code, which is 0%.

Do different coding agents treat Amazon DynamoDB differently?

Not much. Claude Code, Codex and Cursor chose it at similar rates, between 0% and 0% of their runs.

How was this measured?

Real coding agents at pinned versions were run in sandboxes inside 91 realistic codebases and asked to solve real tasks. A simulated project owner approved or questioned each recommendation before any code was written, and a judge from a model family that builds none of the agents read every session blind.

Where this comes from

Armature ran 11,878 judged sessions with Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Grok Build CLI and Muse Code inside 91 realistic codebases, and published every run. The numbers on this page come from that work.

Read next

All library pages