Quick wins for a faster PC:
Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Use these 25 Cursor prompts to guide a React project from repository discovery through implementation, testing, performance investigation, and deployment preparation. They are adaptable templates—not a guarantee that an app is production-ready. Have Cursor inspect the actual codebase, review every proposed change, resolve product-specific decisions, and run the checks that apply to your project.
For each prompt, replace the bracketed text inside the code block with details for your project. If Cursor cannot establish a fact from the repository, ask it to say so rather than guess.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Start by understanding the repository
Use the first prompts without asking Cursor to edit files. In Cursor, you can attach known files or folders with @ context; if you do not know where the relevant code lives, ask Agent to search the repository. Confirm its findings against the files and commands it cites.
1. Map the application and its conventions
Inspect this repository without editing any files. Identify the React entry points, framework or build tool, package manager, route definitions, major application areas, and the conventions used for components, styling, and data access. Cite the relevant file paths for each finding. Mark anything you cannot verify as unknown.2. Find the commands and quality checks
Inspect the package manifests, lockfile, scripts, and project configuration without changing them. Report the package manager and the exact existing commands for development, production build, linting, type checking, and tests. For each command, say whether it is defined and whether you have actually run it. Do not claim a check passed unless you ran it and can report its result.3. Trace configuration and environment requirements
Without printing secret values or editing files, inspect how this application reads environment configuration. List the variable names and where they are referenced, distinguish browser-visible from server-only configuration where the code makes that clear, and identify any required values that are not documented. Do not infer secret values or expose credentials.4. Locate unfinished work and risky assumptions
Search the repository for TODO, FIXME, placeholder, and similar unfinished-work markers, plus obvious assumptions about routes, data, or error handling that affect [feature or area]. Return a prioritized list with file paths and a short explanation of user impact. Do not edit files or treat a marker by itself as proof of a defect.Plan a change before implementing it
For an existing app, ask Cursor to work within the repository’s established architecture before proposing a stack change. If you are starting a new app, choose the foundation based on its routing, data-fetching, rendering, deployment, and maintenance needs. React recommends starting a new app with a framework; its documentation names Next.js App Router and React Router v7 as options. A build-tool-only setup such as Vite, Parcel, or Rsbuild leaves more integration decisions to the project, including routing and data fetching. Decide whether the team needs server-side rendering (SSR), static generation (SSG), or React Server Components (RSC) before choosing.
#1 Best Overall
| Starting point | Useful when | Trade-off to plan for |
|---|---|---|
| A framework | The app’s routing, data fetching, rendering, and deployment needs fit the framework’s supported model. | Confirm the framework’s conventions and deployment requirements match what the team can maintain. |
| A build tool without a framework | The team wants to assemble a client-side app and deliberately own its integrations. | The project must choose and integrate concerns such as routing and data fetching; adding SSR, SSG, or RSC later can require substantial custom work. |
5. Turn a request into acceptance criteria
Analyze this feature request without editing files: [feature request]. Inspect the relevant existing code and return: (1) user-visible behavior, (2) acceptance criteria that can be verified, (3) assumptions, (4) unresolved product decisions, and (5) out-of-scope behavior. Ask me concise questions for decisions that cannot be safely inferred from the repository.6. Identify the smallest safe implementation plan
Using these agreed acceptance criteria: [criteria], inspect the repository and propose the smallest implementation plan that follows its existing patterns. List the files likely to change, the purpose of each change, dependencies between steps, and any risks. Do not edit files yet. Flag any change to a public interface or application architecture for approval.7. Define how the work will be verified
For this feature and its acceptance criteria: [criteria], identify the relevant existing tests and project checks. Propose behavior-focused tests for important user paths and failure cases, using the current test setup. Separate checks you can run from checks that require my input, credentials, or an external service. Do not claim any test has passed.Implement in small, reviewable changes
Ask Cursor to make one coherent change at a time. After each change, inspect the diff, compare it with the agreed plan, and decide whether the next step is still appropriate.
8. Establish the feature boundary
Implement only the first approved step of this plan: [step]. Keep the change limited to the files and behavior needed for that step, follow nearby repository conventions, and preserve existing public interfaces. Before editing, tell me which files you intend to change. After editing, summarize the diff and list anything not implemented. Stop for approval if the step requires an unapproved architectural or product decision.9. Build a component that fits the codebase
Implement [component and responsibility] for [feature] using the existing component, styling, and composition patterns in [relevant files or folders]. Keep responsibilities focused, use the repository's established naming and file conventions, and avoid introducing a new dependency. Explain any necessary deviation from the nearby pattern before making it.10. Follow the existing data-access pattern
Trace how this app currently fetches and updates [kind of data] by inspecting [known files or folders]. Implement the data interaction for [feature] using that pattern. Make loading, success, and failure behavior explicit, and do not invent an endpoint, response shape, or cache policy. Ask me if a required contract is not established in the codebase.11. Make types and boundaries explicit
Review the changes for [feature] and make the data and component boundaries explicit using the project's existing type conventions. Represent known success and error cases clearly; do not use unsafe casts or broad types merely to silence an error. If the actual data contract is unclear, identify the uncertainty instead of fabricating a type.12. Preserve error behavior and recovery paths
Inspect how this application reports and recovers from errors in [relevant area]. Update [feature] so expected failures have a useful user-facing state and unexpected failures are not silently swallowed. Follow existing logging and error-boundary conventions. Do not expose sensitive details to users or invent a recovery action the application cannot perform.13. Review state and effect behavior
Review [feature files] for state and Effect behavior. Identify state that can be derived rather than stored, Effects that may be avoidable, and cleanup needed for subscriptions, timers, or other external work. Explain each proposed change in terms of behavior, then make only changes needed to meet [acceptance criteria]. Do not suppress a warning without diagnosing its cause.14. Keep the public interface stable
Compare the proposed changes for [feature] with the existing exports, component props, routes, and data contracts. Preserve public interfaces unless this task explicitly authorizes a change. If a breaking change is necessary, stop and describe who or what depends on the interface and what approval is needed before proceeding.Specify accessible interactions and complete user states
Make interaction behavior part of the feature’s acceptance criteria, not a final styling pass. These prompts ask Cursor to inspect and improve the code; they do not establish that an app conforms to an accessibility standard.
15. Check keyboard interaction
Inspect the interactive elements in [feature or component]. Describe how a keyboard-only user reaches, operates, and leaves each interaction. Fix issues using appropriate existing HTML elements and the project's patterns. Do not add custom keyboard handling when native behavior is suitable. List any behavior that still needs manual verification.16. Cover loading, empty, error, and success states
Review [feature] against these states: loading, empty result, recoverable error, success, and any relevant partial result. Identify which states the current data flow can actually produce, then implement the missing agreed states using the app's established patterns. Do not invent a state or action that the underlying behavior cannot support.17. Make labels and feedback understandable
Review [form or interaction] for clear labels, instructions, validation feedback, and confirmation of important actions. Follow the repository's existing UI conventions and use semantic elements where appropriate. Keep messages specific to the action and its result. Report any accessibility behavior that needs testing outside code inspection.Test the behavior and review the diff
React’s Strict Mode adds development-only checks, including extra renders and Effect runs, that can reveal impure rendering or missing cleanup. Treat a warning or failing check as something to diagnose, not something to silence by default. React’s React 19 upgrade guidance deprecates react-test-renderer and points web projects toward modern testing libraries such as React Testing Library; verify the installed React version and existing test stack before changing testing tools.
18. Add tests that match the project’s test setup
Inspect the existing test configuration and nearby tests for [feature]. Add behavior-focused tests for these acceptance criteria: [criteria]. Use the current test stack and conventions; do not introduce a new test library unless I approve it. Cover meaningful success and failure behavior, and tell me exactly which test files you changed.19. Check behavior under Strict Mode
Inspect how this app uses React Strict Mode and review [feature] for behavior that could be exposed by its development-only extra renders or Effect runs. If you find a problem, explain its cause and fix the underlying behavior, including missing cleanup where needed. Do not disable Strict Mode or suppress a warning as a shortcut.20. Run only the agreed checks and report results
Run these checks only: [exact commands]. First confirm that each command exists in the project configuration. Do not run deployment, destructive, or credential-dependent commands. Report each command exactly, whether it ran, its exit result, and any relevant output. If a check cannot run, explain why. Do not describe unrun checks as passing.21. Review the final diff for regressions
Review the current diff for [feature] against the agreed acceptance criteria and existing behavior. Look for unrelated edits, regressions to routes or public interfaces, incomplete error and loading states, unsafe assumptions, and tests that do not exercise user-visible behavior. Report findings by severity with file paths. Do not change files during this review; distinguish confirmed issues from possibilities that need verification.Measure performance and prepare delivery
Do not ask for memoization or code splitting as a reflex. First identify a user-visible problem and gather relevant measurements. React’s <Profiler> can measure rendering behavior programmatically, but profiling adds overhead and is disabled by default in standard production builds. A profiling observation should inform a targeted change, not be presented as a production benchmark.
22. Investigate a specific performance symptom
Investigate this observed user-visible performance issue: [symptom, route, and reproduction steps]. Trace the relevant rendering and data flow, identify what can be measured with the project's available tools, and separate measured findings from hypotheses. Do not change code yet or recommend memoization without evidence that rendering is a cause.23. Assess bundle and code-splitting trade-offs
For [route or feature], inspect the current bundle and loading boundaries using tools already configured in this repository. Identify whether code splitting could reduce initial code sent, and assess the effect on network requests and loading order. Explain the likely user impact and implementation complexity; flag any risk of creating a network waterfall. Do not add splitting without a specific, evidence-based reason.24. Check the production build and configuration needs
Inspect the framework or build-tool configuration for this application's production build. Identify the exact existing build command, required configuration, environment variable names, and framework-specific assumptions that affect deployment. Do not reveal secret values, choose a hosting provider, or change configuration. Mark requirements that cannot be established from the repository.25. Prepare a deployment checklist for this app
Based on the repository's verified framework, rendering strategy, build process, and environment requirements, prepare a deployment checklist for [target environment, if known]. Separate confirmed requirements from questions that need an owner or deployment environment to answer. Include relevant build and runtime checks, but do not claim deployment readiness or success. Do not assume a hosting provider or rendering model that the codebase does not establish.Use the prompts as a reviewable workflow
Keep reusable project guidance focused and version-controlled. Cursor supports project rules in .cursor/rules, with configuration that can make a rule always available, match particular files, or make it available on request or through manual invocation. Its documentation also describes AGENTS.md as a simpler Markdown alternative. Put stable conventions—such as which test command to use or how components are organized—in project guidance; keep feature-specific decisions in the prompt for that task.
Cursor can search code, edit files, and run terminal commands through Agent, but those capabilities do not verify correctness on their own. A responsible handoff includes the reviewed diff, unresolved decisions, checks actually run, and anything that remains unverified. The app’s framework and rendering strategy should shape the delivery checklist; React’s documentation does not make one hosting provider the right choice for every project.
Quick Recap
Best Value
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
