I think there are a few nuances here:

1. On the ignore instructions point: using Cursor with Claude as the underlying model is quite different from using Claude directly through Claude Code. The agent/tooling layer can have a pretty big impact on the behavior.

2. On verbosity: IMO, Claude's default writing style tends to be more verbose than GPT's. GPT models are generally more concise when coding, while Claude often explains more. That said, I think this can be mitigated quite a bit by how you harness the model.

3. I agree that it’s worth trying new models. The pace of AI development is so fast that models can change significantly in a short time. But I’d also suggest trying different agent tools rather than sticking with Cursor alone. The tooling and agent loop can make a big difference too.

Consider that verbosity on Token Generation is negligible with respect to the tokens consumed for the prompt and the context, so I think it is just a writing style than can be appreciated or not (to me it is not so bad).

Why would LLMs be concise and to the point? There is no truth in these machines.

p.s. You've just discovered a load bearing seam with your dossier and have a right to push back on this.

Because models that chat to themselves generate more tokens, hence more money is spent.

Easy