screenshot-to-code
Drop in a screenshot and convert it to clean code (HTML/Tailwind/React/Vue)
Runssource: GitHubhomepagePythonMITcommit d026163f586d
Python, MIT licensed.
screenshot-to-code runs. An Argusic agent installed it in 5 minutes and hit no errors on a clean machine with no GPU, and the whole session was recorded.
Backend starts and responds 200 on /, Chromium screenshot preview is enabled, all 276 backend tests pass, all 42 frontend Jest tests pass, frontend builds without errors, and pyright type-checking reports 0 errors.
What the agent ended up with on a clean machine, in its own words. How this is measured
Measured by Argusic on a fresh machine every time. Every number links to its evidence. Argusic Score 94.7 of 100 (the mean of this project's run scores).
At a glance
Subject data from GitHub, linked at the top of this page, refreshed . Test data by Argusic (CC BY 4.0); every number links to a run page with the full log, the recording, and their sha256 hashes.
What was measured
From the run that decided this verdict. Every line is a recorded value, not an estimate.
- Install time
- 5 minutes
- Cold machine to finish
- 6 minutes
- Errors hit and fixed
- 0 hit, 0 fixed with no human help
- How the result was proved
- curl http://127.0.0.1:7001/ returned 200 OK with expected 'backend running' HTML body; pytest: 276 passed; frontend pnpm test (jest): 42 passed, 8 suites; frontend pnpm build: succeeded; pyright: 0 errors
- Model tokens used
- 64,027
- Exact commit tested
- d026163f586d
- Container image
- sha256:cdd920bce783
What was not measured
The other half, so you can see exactly how far this evidence goes. A gap is printed as a gap and never filled in.
- Peak GPU memory
- this ran on a CPU machine, so there was no GPU to sample
- Behaviour over a long run
- each attempt uses the smallest documented settings and a fixed time budget, so this measures whether it runs, not how it holds up under load
Watch the session
The whole run, from a clean machine, at the speed it actually happened. Nothing is cut and nothing is sped up.
A recording of attempt 1, run . The verdict above comes from a different attempt, so read this as one session and not as the current result. The terminal recording it was made from is the evidence, stored with a sha256 fingerprint; the video is a rendering of it. Nothing loads from the video host until you press play.
The end of the recording
The last lines of the terminal session that decided this verdict, exactly as they were recorded.
launch_succeeded=true errors count: 0 backend_tests: 276 passed frontend_jest_tests: 42 passed, 8 suites backend_typecheck: 0 errors frontend_build: succeeded curl: got 200 OK on / chromium_screenshot_preview: enabled Everything is working. Here's the final report: tokens used 64,027 Everything is working. Here's the final report:
Replay the whole session, every command from a clean machine to this point.
How it was tested
One agent, one container, no human help. It installs the project the way its own documentation says to, runs it, and fixes what breaks. Everything below is recorded as it happened: the terminal session, the log and the exact commit. The full method.
Strengths and limits
Measured facts, not opinions. How this is written.
What went well
- Reached a running state on a clean machine, with the session recorded.
- Nothing broke on the way: zero errors between clone and running.
- Ran without a GPU, so it does not need one to start.
- Licensed MIT, as reported by its host.
- Measured 3 times, so the result is not a one-off.
What did not, or is not known
- Took 5 minutes to install, slower than the median of the 3 comparable projects Argusic has measured.
Of the 4 Python projects Argusic has installed and timed, screenshot-to-code was the 3rd fastest to reach a running state, and 3 of 4 reached one at all.
What it is a reasonable choice for
- Trying it on a laptop or a small server: it reached a running state without a GPU.
- A quick evaluation: it was running 5 minutes after the clone.
- Following its own README: the documented path worked with nothing to fix.
Run history
| tested by | attempt | outcome | score | cost USD | when |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Argusic Runner | 3/3 | Runs with mocks | 92.00 | 0.07 | |
| Argusic Runner | 2/3 | Runs | 100.00 | 0.02 | |
| Argusic Runner | 1/3 | Runs with mocks | 92.00 | 0.16 |
Embed the badge
Markdown for the project README. It links back here; terms on the terms page.
[](https://argusic.com/subject/screenshot-to-code)Questions
- Does screenshot-to-code run?
- Yes. screenshot-to-code runs. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 5 minutes, hitting 0 errors on the way, and recorded the session.
- How did Argusic test screenshot-to-code?
- On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit d026163f586d. 3 attempts are recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
- What did it cost to test screenshot-to-code?
- The run that produced this verdict cost $0.02: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.
- How long does screenshot-to-code take to install?
- 5 minutes in the run that decided this verdict, from a clean machine to a running state. That is one measured attempt, not an average.
- Does screenshot-to-code need a GPU?
- Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
- What goes wrong when installing screenshot-to-code?
- Nothing did, in the recorded run: zero errors between clone and running.
- How does screenshot-to-code compare with the alternatives?
- Of the 4 Python projects Argusic has installed and timed, screenshot-to-code was the 3rd fastest to reach a running state, and 3 of 4 reached one at all.
- Where is the evidence for screenshot-to-code?
- All 3 recorded runs are on this page, each linking to its full log and terminal recording, stored with a sha256 fingerprint so it cannot be quietly altered.