My Advice to Google for Gemini 3.1 Pro at coding
I primarily use Claude Opus, but I also have two Google Pro subscriptions across 2 google accounts, so I test Gemini 3.1 Pro frequently for coding inside Antigravity.
It’s a mess.
Tool calling feels inconsistent, context handling is weak, and it often just “goes with the flow” instead of reasoning properly through the task. Something Opus might take 2–4 minutes to carefully build, Gemini finishes in 30 seconds with significantly worse results.
That said, Gemini 3.1 Pro is still a very capable model. It powers Veo, Nano Banana, and several other upper-layer Google AI products, so clearly the core model has strong potential. I think the issue is that Google’s AI team is trying to make one general-purpose model handle too many things at once.
My suggestion: build a dedicated coding-focused branch.
Models like GPT 5.4 in Codex, Qwen 3.5 Code, Claude Opus 4.7 in Claude code and GLM feel far superior for programming workflows because their entire stack is optimized around coding, tool use, context management, reasoning flow, and developer experience. A specialized coding interface would probably make Gemini much more competitive.