Do coding agents recommend Amazon SES?
Amazon SES was chosen in 12% of 351 judged email sending sessions, ranking fifth. Measured with Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Grok Build CLI and Muse Code.
Amazon SES was chosen in 12% of 351 judged email sending sessions, ranking fifth. It was also raised as a candidate in 85 further sessions without being chosen.
This page reports what happened when Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Grok Build CLI and Muse Code had to solve a problem in email sending inside a realistic codebase. Not what a chat assistant says about Amazon SES. What an agent actually installed.
The numbers
| Category | Email sending |
| Sessions in the category | 351 |
| Sessions where Amazon SES was chosen | 41 |
| Install share | 12% |
| Rank in category | 5 of 7 |
| Codebases it won in | 3 |
| Raised as a candidate, not chosen | 85 |
| Chosen when considered | 33% |
| Site | aws.amazon.com |
By agent
Claude Code, Codex, Cursor and Muse Code land within 6 points of each other on Amazon SES, which is closer than most products in this experiment manage. Grok Build CLI ran fewer than 30 sessions here, too few to compare.
| Agent | Sessions | Chose Amazon SES | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Code | 83 | 7 | 8% |
| Codex | 107 | 15 | 14% |
| Cursor | 90 | 12 | 13% |
| Grok Build CLI | 18 | 2 | 11% |
| Muse Code | 53 | 5 | 9% |
By who was asking
Amazon SES does much better with one kind of buyer than another. It won 47% of sessions asked as enterprise team and 2% of those asked as senior engineer.
| Who is asking | Sessions | Chose Amazon SES | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Senior engineer | 275 | 5 | 2% |
| Enterprise team | 76 | 36 | 47% |
What Amazon SES was up against
The full ranking in email sending, from the same sessions:
| # | Product | Runs won | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Resend | 115 | 33% |
| 2 | Postmark | 95 | 27% |
| 3 | Azure Communication Services | 49 | 14% |
| 4 | SendGrid | 44 | 13% |
| 5 | Amazon SES (this page) | 41 | 12% |
| 6 | Generic SMTP | 4 | 1% |
| 7 | Built in-house (no product adopted) | 2 | 1% |
| 8 | Paubox | 1 | 0% |
What this means
Amazon SES was raised in 85 sessions and chosen in 41. That ratio is balanced enough that the ceiling is presence rather than integration: the product converts reasonably when it is on the table, and it is not on the table often enough.
Where these numbers come from
The 351 sessions in email sending are part of a published set of 15,287, run with real coding agents inside realistic codebases and judged blind. The full method is on one page: how we measured this.
Every email sending run can be replayed on the board.
If you work on Amazon SES: 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 SES?
Yes. Amazon SES was chosen in 41 of the 351 judged sessions in email sending, a 12% install share, ranking fifth in its category.
Does Claude Code recommend Amazon SES?
In 7 of the 83 sessions in email sending run with Claude Code, which is 8%.
Do different coding agents treat Amazon SES differently?
Not much. Claude Code, Codex, Cursor and Muse Code chose it at similar rates, between 8% and 14% of their runs.
How was this measured?
Real coding agents at pinned versions were run in sandboxes inside 110 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.
How often is Amazon SES considered but not chosen?
It was raised as a candidate in 85 sessions without being chosen, and chosen in 41. That is a 33% conversion from considered to chosen.
Where this comes from
Armature ran 15,287 judged sessions with Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Grok Build CLI and Muse Code inside 110 realistic codebases, and published every run. The numbers on this page come from that work.