From the experiment

Do coding agents recommend CodeSandbox SDK?

Coding agents raised CodeSandbox SDK in 88 of 520 judged code sandboxes sessions and chose it in none of them.

Published October 14, 2026 Read as Markdown

Coding agents raised CodeSandbox SDK in 88 of 520 judged code sandboxes 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 code sandboxes inside a realistic codebase. Not what a chat assistant says about CodeSandbox SDK. What an agent actually installed.

The numbers

CategoryCode sandboxes
Sessions in the category520
Sessions where CodeSandbox SDK was chosen0
Install share0%
Raised as a candidate, not chosen88
Chosen when considered0%
Sitecodesandbox.io

Which agents raised CodeSandbox SDK

Claude Code, Codex, Cursor and Grok Build CLI considered it and none adopted it. Cursor raised it most often, in 38% of its code sandboxes sessions.

AgentSessionsRaised CodeSandbox SDKChose it
Claude Code12926 (20%)0
Codex1703 (2%)0
Cursor13651 (38%)0
Grok Build CLI348 (24%)0
Muse Code510 (0%)0

Which buyers it came up for

It surfaced most for requests written as senior engineer, in 17% of those sessions. Knowing which buyer already has the product in mind tells you which pages to fix first.

Who is askingSessionsRaised it
Senior engineer46479 (17%)
Enterprise team569 (16%)

What CodeSandbox SDK was up against

The full ranking in code sandboxes, from the same sessions:

#ProductRuns wonShare
1E2B22744%
2Modal13125%
3Vercel Sandbox8116%
4Daytona7314%
5Anthropic Code Execution31%
6Runloop Devboxes31%
7Cloudflare Workers20%

What this means

Raised 88 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 88 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 520 sessions in code sandboxes 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 code sandboxes run can be replayed on the board.

If you work on CodeSandbox SDK: 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 CodeSandbox SDK?

They raise it but do not choose it. Across 88 sessions where CodeSandbox SDK came up as a candidate, agents chose something else every time.

Does Claude Code recommend CodeSandbox SDK?

In 0 of the 129 sessions in code sandboxes run with Claude Code, which is 0%.

Do different coding agents treat CodeSandbox SDK differently?

Not much. Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Grok Build CLI and Muse Code 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 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.

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.

Read next

All library pages