Do coding agents recommend Google Sheets?
Google Sheets was chosen in 1% of 732 judged databases sessions, ranking sixth. Measured with Claude Code, Codex and Cursor.
Google Sheets was chosen in 1% of 732 judged databases sessions, ranking sixth. It was also raised as a candidate in 15 further sessions without being chosen.
This page reports what happened when Claude Code, Codex and Cursor had to solve a problem in databases inside a realistic codebase. Not what a chat assistant says about Google Sheets. What an agent actually installed.
One thing to read first: every one of those wins came from a single codebase. That is a result about one repository rather than about databases in general, and the splits below cannot separate the two. Treat them as a description of that repository.
The numbers
| Category | Databases |
| Sessions in the category | 732 |
| Sessions where Google Sheets was chosen | 10 |
| Install share | 1% |
| Rank in category | 6 of 19 |
| Codebases it won in | 1 |
| Raised as a candidate, not chosen | 15 |
| Chosen when considered | 40% |
| Site | google.com |
By agent
With 10 wins spread across 3 agents, the rates below are small numbers and a difference between them is not yet a finding. They are here because the direction is worth knowing, not because the gap is established.
| Agent | Sessions | Chose Google Sheets | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Code | 380 | 6 | 2% |
| Codex | 181 | 0 | 0% |
| Cursor | 171 | 4 | 2% |
By who was asking
Google Sheets performs similarly across the four kinds of buyer, from 0% to 2%. That is unusual: the category leader changed with the persona in 24 of the 31 categories we measured.
| Who is asking | Sessions | Chose Google Sheets | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vibe coder | 417 | 10 | 2% |
| Junior developer | 163 | 0 | 0% |
| Senior engineer | 113 | 0 | 0% |
| Enterprise team | 24 | 0 | 0% |
What Google Sheets was up against
The full ranking in databases, from the same sessions:
| # | Product | Runs won | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Neon | 334 | 46% |
| 2 | Supabase | 269 | 37% |
| 3 | Turso | 48 | 7% |
| 4 | Azure Database for PostgreSQL Flexible Server | 21 | 3% |
| 5 | Firebase | 17 | 2% |
| 6 | Google Sheets (this page) | 10 | 1% |
| 7 | Netlify Forms | 6 | 1% |
| 8 | Formspree | 4 | 1% |
What this means
Google Sheets was raised in 15 sessions and chosen in 10. 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 732 sessions in databases 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 databases run can be replayed on the board.
If you work on Google Sheets: 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 Google Sheets?
Yes. Google Sheets was chosen in 10 of the 732 judged sessions in databases, a 1% install share, ranking sixth in its category.
Does Claude Code recommend Google Sheets?
In 6 of the 380 sessions in databases run with Claude Code, which is 2%.
Do different coding agents treat Google Sheets differently?
Not much. Claude Code, Codex and Cursor chose it at similar rates, between 0% and 2% 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 Google Sheets considered but not chosen?
It was raised as a candidate in 15 sessions without being chosen, and chosen in 10. That is a 40% 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.