Do coding agents recommend Vercel Functions?
Vercel Functions was chosen in 23% of 476 judged serverless compute sessions, ranking second.
Vercel Functions was chosen in 23% of 476 judged serverless compute sessions, ranking second. It was also raised as a candidate in 163 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 serverless compute inside a realistic codebase. Not what a chat assistant says about Vercel Functions. What an agent actually installed.
The numbers
| Category | Serverless compute |
| Sessions in the category | 476 |
| Sessions where Vercel Functions was chosen | 110 |
| Install share | 23% |
| Rank in category | 2 of 14 |
| Codebases it won in | 3 |
| Raised as a candidate, not chosen | 163 |
| Chosen when considered | 40% |
| Site | vercel.com |
By agent
Claude Code, Codex, Cursor and Muse Code agree closely on Vercel Functions, choosing it at rates within 3 points of each other. Grok Build CLI ran fewer than 30 sessions here, too few to compare.
| Agent | Sessions | Chose Vercel Functions | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Code | 120 | 30 | 25% |
| Codex | 144 | 32 | 22% |
| Cursor | 119 | 26 | 22% |
| Grok Build CLI | 22 | 4 | 18% |
| Muse Code | 71 | 18 | 25% |
By who was asking
Vercel Functions does much better with one kind of buyer than another. It won 48% of sessions asked as junior developer and 0% of those asked as enterprise team.
| Who is asking | Sessions | Chose Vercel Functions | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vibe coder | 60 | 0 | 0% |
| Junior developer | 119 | 57 | 48% |
| Senior engineer | 177 | 53 | 30% |
| Enterprise team | 120 | 0 | 0% |
What Vercel Functions was up against
The full ranking in serverless compute, from the same sessions:
| # | Product | Runs won | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | AWS Lambda | 114 | 24% |
| 2 | Vercel Functions (this page) | 110 | 23% |
| 3 | Built in-house (no product adopted) | 88 | 18% |
| 4 | Azure Functions | 59 | 12% |
| 5 | Cloudflare Workers | 30 | 6% |
| 6 | Google Cloud Run | 14 | 3% |
| 7 | Inngest | 8 | 2% |
| 8 | Fly.io | 8 | 2% |
What this means
A solid second or third position in a category means the agent is genuinely choosing rather than reaching automatically. That is a winnable position, because the inputs it uses can be changed.
The fastest gains are usually in the sessions that were nearly won: read them, find the step where the agent moved on, and fix that step.
Where these numbers come from
The 476 sessions in serverless compute 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 serverless compute run can be replayed on the board.
If you work on Vercel Functions: 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 Vercel Functions?
Yes. Vercel Functions was chosen in 110 of the 476 judged sessions in serverless compute, a 23% install share, ranking second in its category.
Does Claude Code recommend Vercel Functions?
In 30 of the 120 sessions in serverless compute run with Claude Code, which is 25%.
Do different coding agents treat Vercel Functions differently?
Not much. Claude Code, Codex, Cursor and Muse Code chose it at similar rates, between 22% and 25% 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 Vercel Functions considered but not chosen?
It was raised as a candidate in 163 sessions without being chosen, and chosen in 110. 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.