Comparative 5 min read · May 2026

# Mneme HQ vs Cursor Rules

Both inject architectural context into AI coding sessions. One is a suggestion file. The other is enforcement infrastructure. Here is how they differ — and when the difference matters.

By Theo Valmis · Published May 2026 · Updated May 2026

## What Cursor Rules are

- A `.cursorrules` file (plain text) placed at the root of a repo
- Injected as system prompt preamble when Cursor opens a session in that directory
- Written manually — no schema, no typed fields, no version tracking
- One flat file per repo — the same rules apply to every file regardless of context
- Cursor-native: they only work in the Cursor editor
- Suggestions: the model receives them as instructions but can still ignore or contradict them

Cursor Rules solve a practical problem: you want the model to know your project conventions without pasting them into every prompt. For individual developers in Cursor, they work well within those limits.

## What Mneme HQ does differently

Dimension | Cursor Rules | Mneme HQ
--- | --- | ---
File format | Plain text (.cursorrules) | Structured JSON (typed fields: id, scope, status, rationale, supersedes)
Enforcement | Model suggestion — can be ignored | Hook-level blocking on Edit/Write operations
Scope | Whole repo — same rules everywhere | Per-file glob pattern matching (e.g. `services/payments/**`)
Conflict resolution | None — conflicts resolved by the model | Deterministic precedence engine
Decision versioning | No status field, no history | draft / active / superseded with supersedes chain
Multi-agent support | One file per repo | Shared decision corpus queryable by all agents
AI editor | Cursor-native only | Claude Code-native (hooks API)
Open source | Feature of Cursor (closed) | Self-hosted, MIT licence
Cross-team sharing | Committed per repo, no central registry | Queryable corpus; team-wide policies possible

## When Cursor Rules are sufficient

- You use Cursor as your primary editor and have no plans to change
- You are a solo developer — no multi-engineer or multi-agent workflows
- Your rules apply uniformly to every file in the project
- Suggestions are acceptable — you don't need a violation to actually block
- You have no conflicting rule sets (org policy vs team exception, for example)
- You don't need to track when a decision changed or why it was superseded

## When Mneme HQ is required

- You use Claude Code. Cursor Rules only work in Cursor. Mneme HQ integrates directly with Claude Code's hooks API — it operates at the Edit/Write operation level, not at the editor level.
- Your rules are context-specific. A flat `.cursorrules` file cannot distinguish between `services/payments/**` and `analytics/**`. Mneme HQ's glob-scoped rules enforce the right constraints for the right files.
- You need a violation to be stopped. Cursor Rules are injected as context — the model may still generate the forbidden thing. Mneme HQ's hooks block the Edit/Write operation before it lands.
- Your rules conflict. Org-wide policy vs team override vs individual exception — without a precedence model, conflict resolution falls to the model's judgment. Mneme HQ resolves conflicts deterministically.
- You run AI agents. Agents don't read system prompts the way an interactive session does. Hook-level enforcement is the only governance that applies uniformly to both human and agent sessions.
- Decision history matters. When a rule was introduced, when it was superseded, and why — Mneme HQ tracks this. A rules file doesn't.

The fundamental distinction: Cursor Rules are configuration — a text file the model is asked to respect. Mneme HQ is enforcement — a hook that runs at operation time and blocks violations before they happen. For teams where architectural boundaries must hold, configuration is not enough.

## If you use both Cursor and Claude Code

Many engineering teams use Cursor for interactive coding and Claude Code for agentic tasks (refactoring runs, code generation pipelines, automated PR workflows). In that setup, Cursor Rules cover the Cursor sessions and Mneme HQ covers the Claude Code sessions.

They don't conflict — they operate on different editors. But only Mneme HQ provides enforcement at the hook level. If a rule violation matters enough to block, it needs to be in Mneme HQ regardless of which editor it originated from.

## The migration path

Teams that have already written `.cursorrules` files can treat them as a starting point for Mneme HQ's decision corpus. The rules are the same — the difference is converting them into typed JSON entries with scope, status, and rationale fields, then enabling hook-level enforcement.

For a deeper look at how the two differ in practice, see the editorial comparison: Mneme vs Cursor Rules.

## Decision matrix — choose one in 30 seconds

If most of these statements are true, Cursor Rules alone are sufficient:

- You are a solo developer, or a 2–3 engineer team that all use the same editor.
- Your project conventions apply uniformly to every file in the repo.
- You have not yet hit a case where the model ignored a rule and shipped the violation anyway.
- You are not running async or CI agents that touch the codebase outside an editor session.
- You do not need an audit trail of when a rule changed or why.

If any of these statements is true, you have outgrown Cursor Rules and need hook-level enforcement:

- You use Claude Code, Windsurf, GitHub Copilot, or a custom SDK agent in addition to (or instead of) Cursor.
- Different parts of the codebase have different rules — payments services have stricter constraints than analytics, for example.
- You have rules that must hold — a violation should block the diff, not be a suggestion the model can override.
- Two rules sometimes contradict each other and the team currently resolves it through Slack rather than a precedence model.
- You run an agent in CI that opens PRs, and you want the same governance applied there as in interactive sessions.

## FAQ

Can I use Mneme HQ alongside Cursor Rules?
Yes. They operate on different layers and do not conflict. Cursor Rules inject context into Cursor sessions; Mneme HQ runs as a hook on Edit and Write operations regardless of the editor. Many teams keep their `.cursorrules` file and add Mneme on top to gain structured enforcement, precedence resolution, and CI gating — see the Cursor integration guide.
Do I have to migrate my `.cursorrules` file to use Mneme HQ?
Migration is the typical path but not required. Existing `.cursorrules` text becomes the starting input for `project_memory.json` — each rule is converted to a typed entry with id, scope (file glob), status (active / superseded), and rationale. The `mneme init` command scaffolds the schema; populating it is a one-time conversion.
Does Mneme HQ work in editors other than Cursor and Claude Code?
Yes. The decision corpus is tool-agnostic. Native hooks ship for Claude Code; Cursor uses standard rules export from the same corpus; GitHub Copilot, Windsurf, and custom SDK agents are governed via the post-generation enforcement step in CI. The architectural argument for tool independence is on the heterogeneous-agents article.
Is Cursor Rules ever the right tool on its own?
For a solo developer in a single repo, with rules that apply uniformly to every file, no precedence conflicts, and no requirement for hard blocking — Cursor Rules are sufficient. The moment any of those conditions fails, hook-level enforcement and structured precedence become load-bearing. See why prompt memory fails at scale for the structural argument.
Related governance concepts

- Governance propagation

  One compiled decision reaches every agent, every developer, every CI run with identical semantics.

- Multi-agent continuity

  Decisions persist across agents, sessions, and time. Decision-side memory, not agent-side memory.

- Governance infrastructure

  The platform layer that encodes, distributes, versions, and enforces decisions across agents and CI.

- Precedence semantics

  Ordered rules that resolve overlapping decisions deterministically — supersession, scope, recency.