While AI-generated projects achieve an impressive 91% functional correctness, they simultaneously introduce thousands of design issues like high code complexity and duplication, posing significant long-term risks. These issues, ranging from 1,305 to 3,193 per project, according to Arxiv, directly contradict the immediate usability and apparent success of AI-generated code, creating a hidden risk for adopters.

AI-powered integrated development environments (IDEs) are marketed and priced for immediate productivity and functional correctness. However, the code they generate frequently embeds substantial technical debt that is not accounted for in current offerings.

Companies prioritizing speed and upfront cost savings with AI IDEs are likely trading short-term velocity for increased future maintenance costs and a decline in overall code health.

Key Statistics on AI-Generated Code in 2026

  • 91% — average functional correctness score achieved by AI-generated projects, according to Arxiv.
  • 1,305 — minimum number of design issues identified in AI-generated projects by CodeScene, according to Arxiv.
  • 3,193 — maximum number of design issues identified in AI-generated projects by SonarQube, according to Arxiv.
  • $20 — monthly cost for Cursor's Individual Pro plan, providing extended agent limits and access to frontier models, according to Cursor.
  • $40 — per user, per month, for Cursor's Teams Standard plan, which includes centralized team billing and administration, according to Cursor.

Individual and Team Plans: Balancing Cost and Features

The market offers a range of AI IDE plans, from free options to moderately priced subscriptions, catering to individual developers and small teams. However, these plans generally focus on operational controls and access, without explicit features for tracking or mitigating AI-generated technical debt.

1. Cursor

Best for: Individual developers and small teams seeking a dedicated AI IDE with tiered access to advanced models and features.