Junie Review 2026: JetBrains' AI Coding Agent Tested

Quick definition: Junie is an AI coding agent built directly into JetBrains IDEs. Unlike code-completion plugins, it handles multi-step tasks autonomously—planning, writing, testing, and iterating without you managing every step.

One-minute highlights

• Works inside IntelliJ IDEA, PyCharm, WebStorm, GoLand, PhpStorm, and more
• Proposes an execution plan before touching your code—you can review and approve first
• Runs tests and IDE inspections after each change to catch regressions immediately
• Subscription starts at $100/user/year; heavier Junie use needs the $300 AI Ultimate tier

Jump to the specs? Visit the Junie tool page for feature lists, signup links, and related reads.

---

Introduction to Junie

JetBrains has been building developer tools for over two decades. IntelliJ IDEA, PyCharm, WebStorm—these are the IDEs that professional Java, Python, and JavaScript developers have been trusting for a long time. When JetBrains announced Junie in early 2025, the interesting part wasn't that they added AI to their products. It was how they added it.

Junie isn't an autocomplete layer or a chat sidebar grafted onto an existing codebase. It's an agent: it reads your task description, builds a plan, runs through that plan step by step, and verifies the result using the IDE's own inspection and test tooling. The whole thing happens inside the IDE you're already running.

This matters because JetBrains IDEs already have deep static analysis, refactoring tools, and test runners baked in. Junie gets to use all of that. When it writes a function and then runs inspections on it, it's using the same engine that would normally flag your own typos. That's a different proposition from an agent that sends code to a cloud model and pastes the result back.

For developers already living in the JetBrains ecosystem, Junie is worth taking seriously. For developers on VS Code or other editors, it's a non-starter—and that's the most important thing to be clear about upfront.

---

How Junie Works

Before diving into specific features, it helps to understand the two modes Junie operates in:

Code mode is where Junie acts as a full agent. You describe what you want—"add pagination to the user list endpoint and write tests for it"—and Junie proposes a plan. Once you approve, it executes: creates files, modifies existing ones, runs tests, and revises if something fails. You can watch the execution log or step away and review the result.

Ask mode is conversational. You ask questions about the codebase, explore architectural options, or talk through a design decision. Junie answers with full project context—it's not a generic chatbot, it knows your code structure.

Most serious use ends up in Code mode. Ask mode is useful when you're planning something and want a sounding board before committing to an approach.

---

Core Features of Junie

Multi-step task planning

When you give Junie a task, it doesn't start writing immediately. It produces a plan first: a breakdown of what it intends to do, which files it'll touch, and in what order. You can review this before anything happens to your code.

This planning step is one of Junie's genuine strengths. It catches scope issues early—if the plan looks wrong, you can redirect before Junie writes a hundred lines in the wrong direction. It also gives you a way to understand what the agent is doing, rather than just having code appear.

Test-first verification

After each substantive change, Junie runs the relevant tests and IDE inspections. If something breaks, it tries to fix it before surfacing the result to you. This is the "test-first" approach that distinguishes Junie from tools that just generate code and hand it over.

In practice, this reduces the review burden. You're not receiving raw AI output that might compile but fail at runtime. You're receiving output that has at least passed the existing test suite and inspection rules.

Developer blog posts from early adopters (particularly those working on Kotlin and Java projects) consistently highlight this as the feature that builds trust in the tool over time. When Junie says it's done, the code usually runs.

Cross-file editing with project context

Junie doesn't work file by file in isolation. It understands the project structure—imports, class hierarchies, module boundaries—and makes changes across multiple files when the task requires it. If you ask it to add a new service layer, it'll create the service class, update the dependency injection config, and add the necessary imports in calling code.

This is more useful than it might sound. Cross-file reasoning is exactly where single-file autocomplete tools break down. A completion engine can help you write a function; Junie can help you add a feature.

Native IDE tooling access

Because Junie lives inside the IDE, it can use JetBrains' existing tools: the inspections engine, the refactoring APIs, the test runner, the built-in VCS integration. It's not simulating a developer—it's using the same tools you use.

One concrete example: when Junie refactors a method name, it uses the IDE's "rename" refactoring, which updates all references across the project correctly. A simple text-based agent would use find-and-replace and miss some edge cases.

---

Pricing, Plans and Hidden Costs

Junie is part of JetBrains AI, which runs on a credit-based subscription model. Here's what the tiers look like:

Free tier

JetBrains offers a limited free tier for AI features, including basic AI chat. Junie access is included at a low credit allowance—enough to evaluate the tool but not for daily use.

Paid plans

Plan	Price	AI Credits	Notes
AI Pro	$100/user/year	10 credits/30 days	Basic Junie use
AI Ultimate	$300/user/year	35 credits/30 days	Recommended for regular Junie
AI Enterprise	$720/user/year	Maximum credits	Enterprise features, SSO

Credits are consumed per agentic task. Larger, multi-file tasks consume more credits than simple edits. JetBrains allows one-off credit top-ups if you exceed your monthly allowance.

Hidden costs or gotchas

A few things worth knowing before signing up:

IDE edition requirements matter. Junie requires IntelliJ IDEA Ultimate, PyCharm Professional, WebStorm, and similar paid editions. The free Community editions of IntelliJ IDEA and PyCharm don't support Junie. If your team uses Community editions, you'll need to upgrade those too.

Credit consumption is hard to predict. A complex refactoring task might cost several credits. If you run Junie heavily throughout the day, the $300 AI Ultimate tier is the realistic starting point—AI Pro's 10 credits/month won't last long with agentic work.

It's per-user, per-IDE. The credits are tied to your JetBrains account, and you need an active IDE subscription in addition to the AI subscription. For teams already paying for JetBrains toolboxes, this is an add-on cost.

---

Pros and Cons

What we like

• Deep IDE integration: Junie uses the IDE's own inspections and test runner, not a simulation of them. This produces more reliable output than agents working outside the IDE.
• Planning before execution: Reviewing the plan before code runs reduces surprises and misdirected effort.
• Test verification loop: The automatic test-and-fix cycle means less manual checking after each agentic task.
• Natural fit for JetBrains users: No new tool to learn, no context-switching. Junie is a panel in the IDE you're already in.
• Enterprise tier: For teams with security requirements, the Enterprise tier includes SSO and enhanced controls.

What could be better

• JetBrains-only: This is the biggest constraint. If any part of your team uses VS Code, Neovim, or Emacs, Junie doesn't help them. Cross-editor agents like GitHub Copilot or Cursor serve mixed teams better.
• Credit-based limits: Heavy agentic use burns through credits fast. The pricing model rewards occasional use more than continuous daily use.
• Model choice is limited: Junie uses JetBrains' chosen models. You can't swap in your preferred model or use a local LLM the way you can with Continue.dev or Aider.
• Requires paid IDE editions: Community edition users get excluded—a cost consideration for teams or individuals on free tiers.
• Early-stage edge cases: Reviews from beta users note that complex tasks occasionally require human intervention to course-correct. It's more reliable than average but not infallible.

---

How Junie Compares

Junie vs Cursor

Cursor is the comparison most developers reach for, and it's a fair one. Both are agentic coding tools that can handle complex, multi-file tasks.

The key difference is the platform. Cursor is an IDE in its own right—a fork of VS Code with AI built deeply into it. Junie is an agent that extends an existing IDE you might already use.

For a team already running IntelliJ IDEA, Junie requires no workflow change: same IDE, same keybindings, same project structure. Cursor means adopting a new editor. That's a meaningful adoption cost.

For VS Code users, Cursor is a natural migration. For JetBrains users, it means leaving a mature IDE for one that—however good—doesn't match the depth of JetBrains' static analysis and refactoring tools for Java and Kotlin.

If your stack is Java, Kotlin, PHP, or Python and you're on JetBrains today, Junie is worth trying before committing to Cursor. If you're in a mixed-editor team, Cursor's cross-platform story makes it more practical.

	Junie	Cursor
Platform	JetBrains IDEs only	VS Code-based (cross-platform)
Agentic execution	Yes	Yes
Test verification	Built-in via IDE	Optional
Model choice	JetBrains' selection	Multiple models
Price	From $100/year	From ~$192/year
Best for	JetBrains ecosystem	Mixed/VS Code teams

Junie vs GitHub Copilot

GitHub Copilot is the most widely adopted AI coding tool, but comparing it to Junie is slightly apples-to-oranges. Copilot's core product is autocomplete and inline suggestions. Its agentic "Workspace" feature exists but is less mature than Junie's agent mode.

For raw code suggestions as you type, Copilot is fast, well-integrated, and familiar to most developers. For handling a multi-step task from description to tested output, Junie is more capable.

The practical question is what you actually need day-to-day. If you want AI that helps you type faster, Copilot at $10/month is hard to beat. If you want AI that can take a task and complete it while you review the result, Junie's agent approach is better—assuming you're on JetBrains.

Junie vs Aider

Aider is a terminal-based AI coding agent that edits files directly in your repository. It's free, open-source, and model-agnostic.

Junie has more IDE-native polish and the test verification loop. Aider has more flexibility: you can use any LLM, including local models, and it works from any terminal regardless of your editor.

For developers who want control over their model and minimal vendor lock-in, Aider is compelling. For developers who want a tool that works inside their existing IDE with minimal setup, Junie is more practical.

---

Who Should Use Junie

Best for

• JetBrains IDE users who want agentic AI without switching editors
• Java and Kotlin teams where IntelliJ's deep static analysis provides the most value
• Professional developers handling complex multi-file refactoring or feature additions
• Enterprise teams that need SSO and security controls with their AI tooling
• Developers who trust test-driven workflows—Junie's test-first approach is a genuine quality improvement

Not ideal for

• VS Code or Neovim users—there's no path to Junie outside JetBrains IDEs
• Budget-conscious developers—the credit model and paid IDE requirement add up
• Developers who want model choice—Junie uses JetBrains' model selection, not yours
• Open-source advocates—Junie is closed-source and proprietary
• Teams mixing editors—Junie creates a two-tier experience where JetBrains users get the agent and everyone else doesn't

---

Verdict

Junie is a well-executed IDE-native agent for JetBrains users. The test-first verification loop and planning-before-execution model are genuine improvements over agents that just generate code and hand it over. If you're already inside the JetBrains ecosystem and working on the kinds of tasks where deep static analysis matters—Java, Kotlin, Python, PHP—Junie makes a strong case.

The constraint is absolute: JetBrains IDEs only. That's not a minor caveat, it's the central fact about whether Junie is relevant to you. Before evaluating features and pricing, answer that question first.

Assuming you're in the right environment, the pricing is reasonable for teams. AI Pro at $100/year is a starting point, but developers using Junie for real agentic work will need AI Ultimate at $300. Stack that with the cost of paid JetBrains IDE licenses and the investment is real—but comparable to what Cursor users pay.

For the JetBrains developer who's been waiting for AI that actually integrates properly with their toolchain rather than fighting it, Junie is the answer they've been waiting for.

Rating: 7.5/10

---

Try it

• Directory page: Junie on Vibe Coding
• Official website: jetbrains.com/junie
• Pricing: jetbrains.com/ai-ides/buy
• Documentation: jetbrains.com/help/idea/junie.html

---

Related reads

• Best AI Code Editors in 2026
• Windsurf Review
• Continue.dev Review
• Cursor vs Windsurf