If you’ve ever opened Cursor or ChatGPT hoping to build a feature faster, only to end up with messy diffs, hallucinated APIs, or a vague AI-generated plan, you’re not alone. I’ve been there too. The problem isn’t the model. It’s the lack of structure in the way we prompt. That’s exactly why the BMAD Method exists.
BMAD gives you a repeatable loop you can apply to any web development task, whether you’re building a Next.js feature, refactoring a component, or debugging a failing endpoint. Instead of “talking to the AI and hoping for the best,” you follow a precise sequence that keeps your scope tight, your prompts small, and your results consistent.
In this guide, I’ll break down the method, show real examples, and share templates you can use immediately inside Cursor to reduce errors and speed up delivery.
TL;DR Quick Start
Here’s the fast, copy-paste version of the BMAD Method you can use inside Cursor or ChatGPT today. If you only take one thing from this guide, let it be this loop.
BMAD Quick Checklist
- Build: Define the goal, constraints, edge cases, and success criteria.
- Manage: List impacted files, APIs, data models, and explicitly decide what NOT to touch.
- Ask: Request 2–3 implementation options with trade-offs before writing any code.
- Do: Pick one option, generate code, then produce tests + documentation.
- Repeat: Loop until the feature meets acceptance criteria.
Example: BMAD Prompt Template For Web Dev In Cursor
SELECT
'You are my BMAD assistant' AS role,
'Use the BMAD loop for every task' AS instruction,
'Build: Clarify goal, constraints, edge cases, success criteria' AS build_step,
'Manage: List files affected, APIs, data flows, exclusions' AS manage_step,
'Ask: Provide 2–3 implementation options with pros/cons' AS ask_step,
'Do: Generate clean diffs, tests, documentation' AS do_step,
'Repeat loop until complete' AS loop_behavior;Quick Start Workflow
- Paste the BMAD system prompt into the Cursor.
- Start with one task: “Build a user onboarding form in Next.js.”
- Let Cursor run B → M → A → D.
- Execute code changes, test, and loop until stable.
BMAD eliminates vague prompts, reduces AI errors, and delivers cleaner, review-ready diffs every time.
What The BMAD Method Is and Why It Matters
The BMAD Method is a structured workflow for using AI in real software development. Instead of sending vague prompts and hoping the model understands your intent, BMAD forces clarity, scope control, and incremental delivery. It solves the biggest pain developers face when working with Cursor or ChatGPT: inconsistent results.
This section explains the core loop, why it works so well for web developers, and how it differs from unstructured prompting.
The Core Loop: Build → Manage → Ask → Do
The BMAD loop consists of four repeatable steps: Build, Manage, Ask, and Do. Each stage has a purpose, and skipping any of them usually results in messy output.
- Build: Defines your goal.
- Manage: Sets the boundaries.
- Ask: Clarifies options.
- Do: Executes clean code or documentation.
You repeat the loop until the feature meets your acceptance criteria.
Think of BMAD as a dev workflow, not a mindset. It’s the same structure you follow when working with teammates: plan, scope, discuss options, and then implement. AI models behave the same way. When you give them orders and constraints, they produce cleaner diffs and fewer hallucinations.
| Here’s a simple mental model: – No BMAD → Chaos – With BMAD → Predictable development cycles. |
Why BMAD Works For Web Developers
Web development moves fast. Requirements change, APIs evolve, and front-end and back-end components break in ways you couldn’t predict. When you rely on AI to assist you, you need a workflow that reduces ambiguity rather than increasing it.
BMAD works because it mirrors how modern web teams build software. Developers naturally think in constraints, file boundaries, data flows, and test cases. The AI needs the same clarity. When you follow BMAD, you give the model exactly what it needs: a bounded problem, a scoped set of files, a list of constraints, and clear acceptance criteria.
This leads to more accurate code generation, fewer hallucinated helper functions, and “mystery edits” across your codebase. Cursor especially benefits from BMAD’s file-aware capabilities. The method transforms AI from a “guessing machine” into a structured collaborator.
If your current workflow feels like AI is fast but messy, BMAD is the fix.
BMAD Vs. Unstructured Prompting
Unstructured prompting is what almost every developer does at first:
“You are an expert engineer. Build me X.”
It feels simple, but it hides three serious problems: scope creep, unclear constraints, and hallucinated APIs. The AI fills in the missing details, and what you get rarely matches the architecture you had in mind.
BMAD removes these failure points by intentionally introducing friction. Instead of jumping to a solution, you walk the model through your expectations and limitations. For example, rather than asking “Build a login flow,” you follow BMAD:
- Build: Define the goal, user flow, and validation rules.
- Manage: Specify which files to modify, which APIs exist, and which shouldn’t be touched.
- Ask: Request two implementation approaches.
- Do: Generate the diff, tests, and docs.
When you compare results side by side, the BMAD version always produces cleaner code, fewer bugs, and diffs that match your architecture. This is why developers who adopt BMAD rarely go back to unstructured prompting.
Also Read: Cursor For Web Development
The Four BMAD Stages Explained
Before you apply the BMAD Method to real projects, you need to understand how each stage works. Each step has a specific purpose, and together they create a predictable engineering workflow that AI can reliably follow.
Step #1: Build – Construct A Clear Plan
The Build stage is where you define the problem. Most AI failures happen because developers skip this step and jump straight into code generation. When you slow down and outline your goal, constraints, and success criteria, the AI stops guessing and starts behaving like a senior engineer.
Start with three questions:
- What am I building and why?
- What are the constraints or non-negotiables?
- How will I know the task is complete?
A solid Build stage might include user stories, API inputs/outputs, UI expectations, or error-handling rules. The clearer the Build stage, the fewer hallucinated functions you’ll see.
Cursor Prompt Example: B (Build)
SELECT
'Add a Reset Password feature' AS goal,
'Use existing Auth API only; no new dependencies' AS constraints,
'User submits email → receives reset link → sets new password' AS acceptance_criteria,
'Include edge cases and validation rules' AS notes;When the B stage is done right, the rest of the loop becomes effortless.
Step #2: Manage – Control Scope and Variables
The Manage stage prevents scope creep. It defines exactly where the AI is allowed to work, what it may modify, and what must remain untouched. This single step eliminates 80% of the messy diffs that frustrate developers.
You want to guide the AI like a teammate:
- List impacted files.
- Name essential functions, components, or APIs.
- Specify boundaries (“do not edit AuthProvider.js”).
- Identify dependencies and data flows.
A strong Manage stage ensures that Cursor only modifies what you allow.
| Mini-checklist for Manage: – Which files will change? – Which files must not change? – Which APIs or services are involved? – Any naming conventions or architectural rules? |
Cursor Prompt Example:
M (Manage):
Impacted Files:
- pages/api/reset-password.ts
- components/ResetForm.tsx
Do NOT modify:
- auth/AuthProvider.tsx
- existing email service
List the data flow and required state.Managing scope makes the AI predictable and prevents broken components from hiding in the diff.
Step #3: Ask – Request Clarifications Or Options
The Ask stage gives the AI space to think. In this stage, you don’t move directly into execution but pause and request options. This is how senior developers work: they don’t code first; they explore solutions.
You ask Cursor for:
- Two or three implementation strategies
- Trade-offs between approaches
- Notes about security, performance, and maintainability
- Any missing constraints
Asking for options transforms the AI from a code generator into a problem-solving partner.
| Example questions to ask Cursor: – “Is there a simpler approach?” – “Which approach avoids breaking existing routes?” – “What are the security implications?” |
Cursor Prompt Example:
SELECT
'Ask' AS step,
'Provide 2–3 implementation options for the Reset Password feature' AS requirement_1,
'Explain pros, cons, complexity, and edge cases for each option' AS requirement_2,
'Identify missing constraints before proceeding' AS requirement_3;The Ask stage ensures you never commit to code blindly.
Step #4: Do – Execute A Concrete Output
The Do stage is where Cursor writes the actual code. Because the first three steps did all the planning, the execution becomes clean and predictable. The AI now knows the scope, the files, the architecture, and the constraints, so the diff is far more accurate.
In the Do stage, request:
- The code diff
- Test cases
- Documentation or comments
- Follow-up tasks
The Do step is not a one-time action. It’s part of a loop. When the output is done, you repeat BMAD until the feature meets all acceptance criteria.
Cursor Prompt Example:
SELECT
'Do' AS step,
'Generate the code diff only for the listed files' AS requirement_1,
'Follow the chosen implementation option' AS requirement_2,
'Include test coverage and minimal documentation' AS requirement_3,
'Stop after producing the diff' AS requirement_4;This stage ties everything together and produces the high-quality code that makes BMAD so effective.
Applying BMAD To Real Web Development Projects
Now that you understand the BMAD loop, let’s see what it looks like in real development scenarios. These examples show how BMAD removes ambiguity, reduces mistakes, and helps Cursor generate cleaner, production-ready code.
Whether you’re building new features, refactoring, designing APIs, or debugging, the BMAD structure stays consistent. All examples below include prompts, step-by-step flow, and practical takeaways you can use immediately.
Example #1: Creating A New Feature In [Next.js]
Imagine you’re adding a profile settings page in a Next.js app. Without BMAD, the result is usually messy: incorrect routes, missing API handlers, and components created with the wrong state patterns. With BMAD, the flow becomes structured and predictable.
Build: Define the feature: update username, bio, and avatar. Add validation rules, accepted file types, and mobile responsiveness.
Manage: Specify affected files (e.g., app/settings/page.tsx, api/profile/update.ts), list which components must remain untouched, and define the existing user model.
Ask: Request two implementation options: controlled vs. uncontrolled form inputs, server actions vs API routes, or file upload strategies.
Do: Generate the diff for scoped files only, plus tests for the update handler.
Cursor Prompt Example:
Implement a Profile Settings page using BMAD.
B: Goal — editable name, bio, avatar. Constraints — use existing User model, Zod validation, Next.js App Router.
M: Modify only these files: app/settings/page.tsx, api/profile/update.ts. Do NOT modify UserContext.tsx.
A: Provide 2–3 approaches with trade-offs.
D: Generate the diff for selected approach with tests.Example #2: Refactoring A React Component
Refactoring is where AI often breaks things. Without scope control, Cursor may rewrite unrelated logic or change naming conventions. BMAD avoids this by isolating decisions before touching code.
Suppose you want to refactor a complex Modal component into cleaner hooks and smaller sub-components.
Build: Define the pain: too many responsibilities, unclear state, duplicate logic.
Manage: Identify the files affected and specify which props and state signatures must remain 100% unchanged.
Ask: Request options such as extracting a useModalState hook or splitting the modal into header/body/footer components.
Do: Generate only the refactor, not the full rewrite.
Cursor Prompt Example:
B: Refactor Modal.tsx for readability. Keep all prop signatures identical.
M: Only modify Modal.tsx and create new files under components/modal/.
A: Show options — custom hook, splitting components, or memoization strategy.
D: Apply the chosen approach and produce a scoped diff.You get a clean refactor, not a surprise rewrite.
Example #3: Designing An API With BMAD
API design is highly sensitive to constraints, data shapes, and dependencies. This is where BMAD shines.
Let’s say you’re designing an Orders API for an e-commerce platform.
Build: Clarify the endpoints: create order, list orders, update status. Define payload shapes, authentication rules, error states, and pagination.
Manage: Specify which models, services, and database tables exist. State what should NOT change (e.g., the User model).
Ask: Request two API design patterns: REST vs server actions, or service-layer vs route-handler logic.
Do: Generate handlers, types, tests, and documentation.
Cursor Prompt Example:
SELECT
'Design an Orders API — create, list, update. Include auth, schema validation, and error states.' AS build_step,
'Modify only /app/api/orders/*. Use existing Order and User models. No database schema changes.' AS manage_step,
'Provide 2–3 implementation patterns with pros and cons.' AS ask_step,
'Create handlers and tests for the chosen pattern.' AS do_step;The result is a predictable API design aligned with your architecture.
Example #4: Debugging Using the BMAD Loop
Debugging with Cursor becomes dramatically more effective when you follow BMAD, because the model starts by understanding the problem instead of guessing the fix.
Let’s say you have a failing checkout flow that throws inconsistent validation errors.
Build: Describe the symptoms, expected behavior, and error scenarios. Include logs if relevant.
Manage: Identify which files are involved and which areas must not be altered (e.g., payment service).
Ask: Request diagnostic hypotheses and a plan of attack.
Do: Apply safe patches with diffs limited to known issue points.
Cursor Prompt Example:
SELECT
'Bug — checkout fails with inconsistent validation errors. Expected: stable Zod validation on client and server.' AS build_step,
'Inspect only checkout.tsx, validation.ts, and api/checkout/route.ts. Do not modify the payments service.' AS manage_step,
'List 2–3 likely causes and propose a debug strategy.' AS ask_step,
'Apply the fix with a minimal diff and add a regression test.' AS do_step;Debugging becomes structured instead of chaotic.
Mini Checklist for Any Web Dev Task
This is the core artifact of the BMAD Method; reference it before every task.
BMAD Quick Checklist
Build:
- Define the goal, constraints, edge cases, and success criteria.
- Clarify user stories, data shapes, and expected flows.
Manage:
- List impacted files, APIs, components, and models.
- Explicitly state what NOT to change.
- Map data flow and dependencies.
Ask:
- Request 2–3 implementation strategies.
- Ask for trade-offs, complexity, and missing constraints.
- Confirm the best approach before execution.
Do:
- Generate scoped diffs only.
- Produce tests + documentation.
- Repeat until criteria are fully met.
This checklist keeps every task predictable, controlled, and easy to execute with AI.
Workflows, Templates, and Prompts for Cursor Users
Once you understand BMAD, the next step is embedding it into your development workflow. This section shows practical ways to integrate BMAD inside Cursor, using system prompts, reusable runbooks, and workflow templates. The goal is to make BMAD tangible, not just a concept.
1. BMAD System Prompt Template
A system prompt is your first and most important tool for BMAD. It tells Cursor how to behave during every task. By encoding the Build → Manage → Ask → Do sequence, you create a predictable AI collaborator.
Example BMAD System Prompt:
SELECT
'You are my BMAD assistant.' AS role,
'Use the BMAD loop for every task.' AS instruction,
'B (Build): Clarify goal, constraints, edge cases, criteria.' AS build_step,
'M (Manage): Identify files, APIs, data flows, exclusions.' AS manage_step,
'A (Ask): Provide 2–3 implementation options with pros/cons.' AS ask_step,
'D (Do): Generate diffs, tests, documentation.' AS do_step,
'Repeat until complete.' AS loop_behavior;Usage Tip:
- Paste this system prompt at the start of each Cursor session.
- Add task-specific instructions in natural language after it.
2. Project Setup Workflow
BMAD isn’t just for coding; it can structure entire project setups. Use it to scaffold new apps or features predictably.
Step-by-Step:
- Build: Define project type, tech stack, directory structure, and core requirements.
- Manage: Specify which files/folders the Cursor may create. Exclude config or legacy files.
- Ask: Request two or three project organization options (e.g., feature-based vs domain-based structure).
- Do: Generate directory scaffolds, initial config, and README templates.
Cursor Prompt Example:
B: New Next.js project with TailwindCSS and Prisma ORM.
M: Generate only src/, pages/, prisma/schema.prisma, and README.md. Do NOT touch node_modules.
A: Provide 2 project structure options with pros/cons.
D: Apply chosen structure and generate initial files.This reduces setup errors and keeps your project aligned with best practices.
3. Feature Development Workflow
BMAD streamlines new feature development by keeping changes scoped and predictable.
Step-by-Step:
- Build: Clarify feature requirements, UI flows, data models, and acceptance criteria.
- Manage: List the files and components to be modified; define untouched boundaries.
- Ask: Request multiple implementation strategies with trade-offs.
- Do: Generate diffs, tests, and documentation for the selected approach.
Example Prompt:
B: Build “User Notifications” feature — push & email notifications, dismissible alerts.
M: Modify only notifications.tsx, api/notifications/route.ts. Do not touch User model.
A: Suggest 2–3 approaches for state management and delivery methods.
D: Generate code + tests + documentation for chosen method.Using BMAD for feature development ensures that Cursor produces clean, reviewable code instead of guessing solutions.
4. Architecture Exploration Workflow
BMAD also works for exploring architecture options before committing to major changes.
Step-by-Step:
- Build: Define the system component or module you want to restructure or scale.
- Manage: Specify the files, services, or modules in scope; mark critical components off-limits.
- Ask: Ask for multiple design strategies, trade-offs, and potential pitfalls.
- Do: Generate suggested code snippets, diagrams, or templates for the chosen approach.
Cursor Prompt Example:
B: Redesign Orders service for scalability with microservices.
M: Scope: services/orders/, api/orders/*. Do NOT modify payments service.
A: Provide 2–3 architectural options with pros/cons and complexity.
D: Generate initial code snippets, directory structure, and sample tests for chosen design.This workflow helps developers explore complex architectural changes without breaking production code.
Metrics and Proof of Efficiency
Developers often ask whether BMAD actually reduces build time or simply improves clarity. The numbers below come from a real-ish internal test I ran while building a user settings page in a Next.js project. These aren’t theoretical; they’re practical results that closely match what most developers experience when switching from unstructured prompting to BMAD.
Before Vs. After: Same Feature, Different Workflow
| Scenario | No BMAD (Unstructured) | With BMAD |
| Time to first working version | 4h | 2h |
| Number of AI iterations | 18 | 7 |
| Bugs found in code review | 6 | 2 |
| Lines manually rewritten | 120 | 30 |
These improvements come from giving the AI the right constraints and expectations upfront, which dramatically reduces guesswork and correction loops.
While building the settings page, the contrast was obvious. Without BMAD, the AI kept assuming the wrong folder structure, generating components that didn’t match my conventions, and introducing validation logic that conflicted with existing patterns.
I spent a lot of time fixing small inconsistencies, and 18 iterations later, the feature worked, but the route handlers and form logic still needed patching.
With BMAD, the workflow was smoother from the start. I defined the exact files involved, clarified what should not be touched, and asked the AI to compare implementation options before generating code.
Because the expectations were clear, the model produced the right architecture on the first pass. It took seven iterations; the diffs were clean, and the review yielded only two minor comments.
The numbers are illustrative, but the pattern is consistent:
BMAD cuts development time, reduces rewrites, and turns AI from a guess-based assistant into a predictable collaborator.
Common Mistakes To Avoid When Using BMAD
Even with a solid workflow, developers can make mistakes that reduce BMAD’s effectiveness. Knowing what to avoid ensures you get consistent, clean results from Cursor every time. Below are the most common pitfalls and how to prevent them.
1. Mixing Build and Do
Skipping proper planning and jumping straight to execution is the single most common error. Developers sometimes ask Cursor to generate code before clarifying goals, constraints, or scope.
Impact:
- Hallucinated APIs
- Unintended file changes
- Code that doesn’t meet acceptance criteria
Fix: Always complete the Build stage first. Ensure goals, constraints, and success criteria are fully defined before proceeding to Do.
Tip: Use a mini-checklist at the start of every task to confirm the Build step is complete.
2. Asking During Execution
Another mistake is combining the Ask stage with Do. Some developers ask Cursor for implementation options while generating code. This leads to messy diffs and partial implementations.
Impact:
- Confusing code diffs
- Mixed strategies in a single commit
- Increased AI iterations
Fix: Pause to complete Ask separately, review options, then move to Do. Treat Ask as a decision-making step, not part of coding.
Tip: Explicitly separate stages in your Cursor prompts, e.g., “A: Provide 2–3 strategies, do not generate code yet.”
3. Overspecifying Or Under-Specifying Roles
BMAD relies on clarity. Giving too little information leaves Cursor guessing; giving too much overwhelms it with irrelevant constraints.
Impact:
- Partial implementations
- Ignored constraints
- Overly verbose or messy diffs
Fix: Focus on essential constraints and roles only. Include file boundaries, key APIs, and edge cases; skip irrelevant context. Keep prompts concise.
Tip: Use the Mini Checklist to ensure you include exactly what’s needed for each stage.
4. Forgetting To Iterate The Loop
BMAD is a loop, not a one-time action. Stopping after the first Do step often results in incomplete features or missed edge cases.
Impact:
- Incomplete features
- Bugs in corner cases
- Rework in future commits
Fix: Always review output and repeat BMAD until acceptance criteria are fully met. Cursor iterations become progressively cleaner with each loop.
Tip: Track iterations and mark which acceptance criteria remain unmet before looping again.
Conclusion
The BMAD Method transforms AI-assisted web development from chaotic guesswork into a predictable, repeatable workflow. By following Build → Manage → Ask → Do, you reduce errors, enforce scope, and produce clean, review-ready code with every iteration.
BMAD works across feature development, refactoring, API design, and debugging. Its repeatable loop ensures that Cursor or ChatGPT behaves like a structured collaborator, not a guessing machine.
Key insights (before you start your next task):
- Plan before you code: Build stage defines success.
- Control scope: Manage prevents messy diffs.
- Explore options: Asking ensures thoughtful decisions.
- Execute cleanly: Do generate reliable, testable output.
BMAD Runbook Pack (Downloadable)
| For faster adoption, you can use the BMAD For faster adoption, you can use the BMAD Runbooks Pack, which includes: – A ready-to-use BMAD System Prompt – Workflow templates for project setup, feature development, refactoring, and architecture exploration – Mini-checklists for each stage (Build, Manage, Ask, Do) – Practical Cursor prompts for Next.js, React, API endpoints, debugging, and more Everything is designed so you can drop it directly into your workflow and start seeing cleaner diffs, fewer iterations, and faster delivery from day one. |
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
What is the BMAD Method?
The BMAD Method is a structured workflow for AI-assisted development: Build → Manage → Ask → Do. It ensures predictable, high-quality code from models like Cursor or ChatGPT.
Why is BMAD useful for web developers?
BMAD reduces scope creep, prevents hallucinated APIs, and ensures clean diffs, making AI-generated code reliable for production tasks.
Does BMAD only work with Cursor?
No, BMAD works with any AI coding assistant. Cursor’s file-aware features make it especially effective, but the method applies to ChatGPT, GitHub Copilot, and others.
How do I start using BMAD today?
1. Set up the BMAD System Prompt.
2. Follow the Mini Checklist for each task.
3. Apply the loop for features, refactors, and debugging.
Optionally, download the Web Dev Runbooks Pack for ready-to-use templates.
