How to Migrate From Continue to Cline
Continue and Cline both live in the VS Code extension marketplace, both support local and cloud models, and both are open source. The developers who move from Continue to Cline are usually hitting the same point: they want the AI to stop suggesting changes and start making them. Continue is excellent at chat-first, conversation-driven coding assistance. Cline's Plan/Act model is built for autonomous execution.
The transition often happens after a developer spends an afternoon with a colleague who uses Cline and watches it complete a multi-step feature implementation, running tests and self-correcting, while their own Continue workflow requires manually applying each suggestion. That's the gap.
What's actually different
Continue's design philosophy is "you're in control, the AI assists." Cline's is "describe what you want, review and approve, the AI executes." Both have their place, and the choice between them reflects how much you want to supervise each step.
| Feature | Continue | Cline |
|---|---|---|
| Inline autocomplete | Yes (Autocomplete) | No |
| Chat interface | Yes (strong) | Yes |
| Autonomous file edits | No (suggests, you apply) | Yes (Plan/Act) |
| Shell command execution | No | Yes (with approval) |
| Model flexibility | Yes (any OpenAI-compatible) | Yes (any OpenAI-compatible) |
| Local model support | Yes (Ollama, LM Studio) | Yes (Ollama, LM Studio) |
| Custom slash commands | Yes (extensive) | Limited |
| Context providers | Yes (many built-in) | File/repo-level |
| API cost visibility | Basic | Per-session token count |
| Pricing | Free / Pro $10 | Free (pay own API costs) |
The Plan/Act distinction is central to Cline's identity. In Plan mode, Cline reads your codebase and produces an explicit plan for the task you've described. You review and approve (or modify) the plan. In Act mode, it executes step-by-step, showing each file change and asking for approval on shell commands. This is different from Continue's "AI suggests, you paste" pattern.
Mapping your existing workflow
Continue's autocomplete. Cline doesn't have inline autocomplete. This is a real loss if you relied on Continue's Tab completion. If autocomplete matters to you, keep Continue running alongside Cline, using Continue for completions and Cline for agentic tasks. The two extensions coexist in VS Code without conflict.
Continue Chat. Cline's chat is roughly equivalent for conversational questions. The main difference is that in Cline, asking "how should I implement X?" produces a response you can immediately escalate into an Act session. The handoff from "discuss" to "execute" is smoother.
Continue's context providers. Continue has a rich system for pulling in context: @file, @folder, @git diff, @github issues, @database schema, and more. Cline's context model is simpler: it reads files and your repo structure but doesn't have the same breadth of context providers. If you built workflows around specific Continue context providers (especially @database schema or @github issues), check whether Cline covers them before migrating.
Custom slash commands. Continue lets you define custom slash commands that run prompts or scripts. Cline doesn't have an equivalent feature. If you have a library of custom /commands, you'll lose them. Some can be recreated as prompts you keep in a text file; others just disappear.
BYOM (bring your own model). Both tools support local models via Ollama and LM Studio and any OpenAI-compatible API. Your model configuration from Continue translates directly: if you were pointing Continue at http://localhost:11434 for Ollama, Cline supports the same endpoint.
The actual migration steps
1. Install Cline. Search "Cline" in VS Code Extensions or install from the marketplace page. It installs alongside Continue without conflict.
2. Configure your model. Cline's settings (gear icon in the Cline sidebar) accept an OpenAI-compatible endpoint or direct Anthropic/OpenAI keys. If you were using a custom Ollama endpoint in Continue, enter the same values in Cline. If you were using Continue's free model tiers, you'll need your own API key for Cline.
3. Review your Continue config. Open ~/.continue/config.json. Note which models you used, any custom slash commands, and any context provider configurations. Port the model configs to Cline settings. Accept that slash commands don't transfer.
4. Create a .clinerules file. Cline reads .clinerules at the project root for persistent instructions (similar to .cursorrules). Move your Continue custom instructions and context framing into this file.
5. Set your permission preferences. In Cline settings, configure how permissive you want it to be with file edits and shell commands. For first use, keep approvals on for everything. You can expand auto-approve for common safe operations (linting, testing) after a few sessions.
6. Try a Plan/Act session. Open a project, open Cline's sidebar, describe a task. Click "Plan" to see Cline's proposed approach before it touches anything. Review the plan, then click "Act" to execute. This two-phase model is the key behavior to get comfortable with.
7. Decide on Continue. Because Cline doesn't have autocomplete, you have three options: keep Continue for autocomplete, find another autocomplete extension (Supermaven, Copilot), or accept no inline completions. Most developers keep Continue running for Tab completion.
First-day checklist:
- Cline installed and model configured
.clinerulesfile in place- One Plan/Act session completed
- Autocomplete strategy decided (Continue, other, or none)
- API cost monitoring enabled
Gotchas you'll hit
API costs are your responsibility. Continue Pro gives you managed model access. Cline is free as software but requires your own API keys, and agentic sessions with Claude 3.7 Sonnet or GPT-4o can cost $1-5 per complex task. Cline's sidebar shows per-session token usage, which helps with monitoring.
Shell command approvals slow things down at first. Cline asks before running any shell command. Until you've configured auto-approve for your safe commands (npm test, cargo fmt, etc.), every test run needs a click. Set up auto-approve rules early.
No autocomplete. Worth saying twice. If you're used to Cursor Tab or Continue's autocomplete, the first few days without inline suggestions feel wrong. Keep Continue for completions.
Cline can be chatty. By default, Cline explains its reasoning for each step in the Act phase. This is useful for learning but verbose when you just want the task done. You can adjust verbosity in settings.
Context provider gaps. If Continue's @github issues or @database schema providers were part of your daily workflow, those capabilities don't exist in Cline. Plan for how you'll handle those cases manually.
Large tasks need good prompts. Cline's autonomous execution is only as good as your task description. Vague prompts produce plans that look plausible but target the wrong scope. Being specific ("add pagination to the getUsers endpoint in routes/users.ts, using the existing cursor pattern in routes/posts.ts") produces much better results.
When NOT to switch
Stay with Continue if:
- Inline autocomplete is a meaningful part of your workflow. Continue has it; Cline doesn't.
- You rely on Continue's context providers, especially
@github issues,@database schema, or custom context providers you've written. - Your custom slash commands are load-bearing. There's no equivalent in Cline.
- You prefer a chat-first, suggestion-based flow where you control every edit. Cline's autonomous model requires a different mindset.
- You're using Continue's free managed models. Cline requires your own API keys.
Cline is worth the switch when you're frustrated applying suggestions manually and want an agent that executes. The Plan/Act model is genuinely different from Continue's approach, and for tasks involving multiple files, test execution, and iterative fixing, Cline completes them faster.
You don't have to choose one. Running Continue for autocomplete and Cline for agentic tasks is a practical setup that many developers land on. The two extensions don't conflict, and the combination gives you inline completions plus autonomous execution without compromising either. Start there, and reduce to one tool if you find yourself only using one.