Cursor's AI assistant was failing to work properly with a Web3 authentication flow. The problem was that the API was being called before the user had signed anything in MetaMask. Cursor's solution was to use the React hook pattern for 'useSignMessage' The AI didn't understand the specific behavior of React hooks.Cursor's AI assistant was failing to work properly with a Web3 authentication flow. The problem was that the API was being called before the user had signed anything in MetaMask. Cursor's solution was to use the React hook pattern for 'useSignMessage' The AI didn't understand the specific behavior of React hooks.

Human Oversight Remains Essential for AI Coders

A cautionary tale about trusting Cursor's AI too much and the importance of understanding your tools

The Setup

Recently, I was working on a Web3 authentication flow using React, wagmi, and a Node.js backend. The goal was simple: connect wallet → sign message → verify signature → get JWT token. Sounds straightforward, right?

The Problem

The authentication flow wasn't working correctly. When users clicked "Sign Message & Login", the backend verification API was being called immediately, before the user had actually signed anything in MetaMask. This was clearly wrong.

The AI's "Solution"

I asked Cursor's AI assistant to fix this issue. Here's what happened:

First Attempt: The Async/Await Mistake

// AI's initial "fix" const signature = await signMessage({ message }); 

The AI assumed signMessage was an async function and tried to await it. This was completely wrong.

Second Attempt: Still Not Getting It

// AI's second attempt - still wrong const { signMessage, isPending } = useSignMessage(); // ... later const signature = await signMessage({ message }); // Still trying to await! 

The AI was still treating signMessage as if it returned a Promise, even after I pointed out it wasn't async.

Third Attempt: Finally Understanding the Hook Pattern

Only after I explicitly explained that signMessage is a function from a React hook (not an async function) did the AI implement the correct pattern:

// Correct implementation const { signMessage, isPending, data: signature, error: signError } = useSignMessage();  // Use useEffect to listen for signature completion useEffect(() => {   if (signature && pendingNonce && address) {     handleSignatureComplete(signature, pendingNonce, address);   } }, [signature, pendingNonce, address]);  // Trigger signing (non-blocking) const handleSignAndLogin = async () => {   // ... get nonce   signMessage({ message }); // This triggers MetaMask popup   // Don't await this - it's not async! }; 

Why This Happened

1. Pattern Recognition vs. Understanding

The AI recognized common patterns (async/await for API calls) but didn't understand the specific React hook pattern for useSignMessage. It applied the wrong mental model.

2. Lack of Context Awareness

Even when I mentioned "wagmi hook", the AI didn't connect this to the specific behavior of React hooks that trigger side effects rather than return promises.

3. Overconfidence in Initial Solutions

The AI presented its first solution with confidence, making it seem like the correct approach. This can lead developers to trust the solution without questioning it.

The Correct Solution

Here's how the authentication flow should actually work:

const { signMessage, isPending, data: signature, error: signError } = useSignMessage();  // Listen for signature completion useEffect(() => {   if (signature && pendingNonce && address) {     handleSignatureComplete(signature, pendingNonce, address);   } }, [signature, pendingNonce, address]);  const handleSignAndLogin = async () => {   setLoading(true);   try {     // Get nonce from backend     const { data } = await axios.get('/auth/nonce');     const { nonce } = data;      // Store nonce for later use     setPendingNonce(nonce);      // Create message to sign     const message = `Sign this message to authenticate: ${nonce}`;      // Trigger signing (shows MetaMask popup)     signMessage({ message });    } catch (error) {     setLoading(false);     // Handle error   } };  const handleSignatureComplete = async (signature, nonce, address) => {   try {     // Verify signature with backend     const { data: authData } = await axios.post('/auth/verify', {       address,       signature,       nonce     });      if (authData.success) {       // Store JWT and update UI       localStorage.setItem('authToken', authData.token);       setUser(authData.user);       setIsAuthenticated(true);     }   } catch (error) {     // Handle verification error   } finally {     setLoading(false);     setPendingNonce(null);   } }; 

Conclusion

Cursor's AI assistant is a powerful tool, but it's not a senior developer. It can help with:

  • ✅ Code generation
  • ✅ Pattern suggestions
  • ✅ Boilerplate reduction
  • ✅ Documentation

But it struggles with:

  • ❌ Complex architectural decisions
  • ❌ Domain-specific patterns
  • ❌ Understanding context deeply
  • ❌ Making critical business logic decisions

The key takeaway: Use Cursor's AI as a powerful junior developer that needs constant oversight, not as a replacement for understanding your code and your tools.

Always question, always test, and always understand what you're building. The AI might write the code, but you're responsible for making sure it works correctly.


Have you had similar experiences with Cursor or other AI coding assistants? Share your stories in the comments below!

Market Opportunity
Sleepless AI Logo
Sleepless AI Price(AI)
$0.03657
$0.03657$0.03657
+2.46%
USD
Sleepless AI (AI) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Thyroid Eye Disease (TED) Treatments Market Nears $4.3 Billion by 2032: Emerging Small Molecule Therapies Targeting Orbital Fibroblasts Drive Revenue Growth – ResearchAndMarkets.com

Thyroid Eye Disease (TED) Treatments Market Nears $4.3 Billion by 2032: Emerging Small Molecule Therapies Targeting Orbital Fibroblasts Drive Revenue Growth – ResearchAndMarkets.com

DUBLIN–(BUSINESS WIRE)–The “Thyroid Eye Disease Treatments Market – Global Forecast 2025-2032” report has been added to ResearchAndMarkets.com’s offering. The thyroid
Share
AI Journal2025/12/20 04:48
Virtus Equity & Convertible Income Fund Announces Special Year-End Distribution and Discloses Sources of Distribution – Section 19(a) Notice

Virtus Equity & Convertible Income Fund Announces Special Year-End Distribution and Discloses Sources of Distribution – Section 19(a) Notice

HARTFORD, Conn.–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Virtus Equity & Convertible Income Fund (NYSE: NIE) today announced the following special year-end distribution to holders of its
Share
AI Journal2025/12/20 05:30
Fed rate decision September 2025

Fed rate decision September 2025

The post Fed rate decision September 2025 appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. WASHINGTON – The Federal Reserve on Wednesday approved a widely anticipated rate cut and signaled that two more are on the way before the end of the year as concerns intensified over the U.S. labor market. In an 11-to-1 vote signaling less dissent than Wall Street had anticipated, the Federal Open Market Committee lowered its benchmark overnight lending rate by a quarter percentage point. The decision puts the overnight funds rate in a range between 4.00%-4.25%. Newly-installed Governor Stephen Miran was the only policymaker voting against the quarter-point move, instead advocating for a half-point cut. Governors Michelle Bowman and Christopher Waller, looked at for possible additional dissents, both voted for the 25-basis point reduction. All were appointed by President Donald Trump, who has badgered the Fed all summer to cut not merely in its traditional quarter-point moves but to lower the fed funds rate quickly and aggressively. In the post-meeting statement, the committee again characterized economic activity as having “moderated” but added language saying that “job gains have slowed” and noted that inflation “has moved up and remains somewhat elevated.” Lower job growth and higher inflation are in conflict with the Fed’s twin goals of stable prices and full employment.  “Uncertainty about the economic outlook remains elevated” the Fed statement said. “The Committee is attentive to the risks to both sides of its dual mandate and judges that downside risks to employment have risen.” Markets showed mixed reaction to the developments, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average up more than 300 points but the S&P 500 and Nasdaq Composite posting losses. Treasury yields were modestly lower. At his post-meeting news conference, Fed Chair Jerome Powell echoed the concerns about the labor market. “The marked slowing in both the supply of and demand for workers is unusual in this less dynamic…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 02:44