Scans the current page on demand for signals that it was built with an AI coding tool or no-code AI app builder.
Users
5
−1 in 30 days
Rating
0.0 / 5
unchanged in 30 days
Ratings
0
0 in 30 days
Store rank
#258K
#215K among extensions
Version
0.1.0
updated 14 Aug 2026
Users
monthly, 2 months
Latest, 16 Oct 2026:5 usersMove the mouse over the chart for any month
Ratings count
monthly, 2 months
Latest, 16 Oct 2026:0 ratingsMove the mouse over the chart for any month
The Chrome Web Store rounds user counts down to the leading digit, so the user line moves in steps. The ratings count is exact and is the better signal of real adoption.
About Vibeprint
Vibeprint tells you whether the page you're on was likely built with an AI coding tool —
Lovable, Bolt.new, Base44 — and shows you exactly which signals it found. It also recognises
visual builders — Framer, Webflow, Wix and Replit — and is careful to say that those identify
the tool rather than prove AI authorship.
Click the toolbar icon. It reads the page, matches it against known builder fingerprints, and
gives you a verdict with the evidence behind it. Nothing runs until you click.
WHAT MAKES IT DIFFERENT
Most of the guesswork in this space is vibes. Vibeprint is calibrated against 71 real websites
captured live, with published accuracy numbers: precision 1.000, recall 0.967. The hand-built
half deliberately includes the hardest cases — sites like vercel.com and ui.shadcn.com that
use the exact fonts, components and dark gradient aesthetic people associate with AI output.
None of them are falsely accused.
EVIDENCE, NOT ACCUSATIONS
Every verdict comes with a breakdown, grouped by how much it actually proves:
• Conclusive — identifies a specific builder (a hosted runtime script, a generator tag)
• Suggestive — common in generated code, but not exclusive to it
• Circumstantial — also seen on hand-built sites
A confident verdict requires conclusive evidence. Buzzwords, a default font, and platform
hosting can never add up to an accusation on their own — that rule is enforced in code, not
just intended.
HONEST ABOUT LIMITS
A site can be AI-built and leave no trace. Builders that host what they generate (Lovable,
Bolt, Base44, Framer) leave fingerprints behind, but only Lovable, Bolt and Base44's
fingerprints prove AI authorship — Framer's proves only which tool was used. Tools like v0
hand you code you deploy yourself, leaving nothing to detect. When there's no evidence,
Vibeprint says "Not enough signal" instead of guessing. That's a real answer, not a failure.
PRIVACY
• The page is read in memory only, while you look at the result — nothing is kept
• No network requests — nothing leaves your browser, ever
• No background process, no content scripts, no storage
• No host permissions: it cannot touch a page you haven't asked it to scan
• Fully open source
Permissions used: activeTab (temporary access to the current tab, only when you click) and
scripting (to run the reader on that page).
Source code and accuracy methodology: https://github.com/erkanrzgc/vibeprint