Design and diagrams decision

MiroMiro

A competent technical user can implement the core extension functionality and maintain it; the commercial product's hosted API, polish, and user base are the main differences.

Visit website
You pay

$9/mo

$108/yr

Read off the official pricing page.

You’d pay instead

$100one-off92 h to build

$0/mo1 h/mo upkeep

On cash alone, building overtakes the subscription at 1 seat.

Open-source builds that already do this

Every project below is open source and already does this job today. Fork one, self-host it, or take the parts you need - the build prompt further down assumes an empty file, and this is the shortcut past that. Licences differ; check the one on each card before you ship. All MiroMiro alternatives, with the arithmetic →

What a replacement has to do

  • Select an element on a live page → read computed DOM styles and assets in the content script → convert styles to Tailwind / CSS and collect assets/Lottie → present editable overlay and allow download/export to clipboard or local library

What it still won’t have

  • Polish, cross-browser testing and UX improvements of the commercial extension
  • Hosted MCP server and managed REST API for agent integrations
  • Chrome Web Store reputation, prebuilt user base and support channels
  • Lifetime deal billing and packaged priority support

What remains hard

  • Brand trust20,000+ developers & designers
Read the build prompt

First-year cost

Keep paying

Paying is—cheaper in year one.

On cash alone, building overtakes the subscription at 1 seat.

Paid seatsseats

Money you would actually spend

Keep paying
—

Subscription price × seats × 12

Build it
—

AI build —APIs + hosting —

Time you would spend

—

—

What you would spend

What we assumed

The verdict above measures whether you could build it. This one is only about money.

Runnable build prompt

Not run yet
Build a Chrome extension (content script + popup UI) and optional minimal Node.js dev server for packaging. Stack: vanilla JS/TypeScript for extension, Tailwind for popup UI, Node.js + Express for optional dev API, chrome.storage for library. Core features in scope: (1) content script to read rendered DOM and computed styles for a selected element, (2) CSS-to-Tailwind conversion and HTML generator, (3) asset and Lottie discovery and download, (4) hover/select overlay with live style edits and copy-to-clipboard, (5) local library persisted in chrome.storage and download manager. Out of scope: hosted MCP server, user accounts, paid billing, analytics dashboard, wide browser compatibility beyond Chromium. Include error handling, unit tests for conversion logic, and end-to-end tests for the extension install and basic extraction flows.
How we checked4 sources · 3/3 runs agreed · evidence score 67

How the score was reached

  • Partly verdict base52
  • An open-source build was found+5
  • 4 cited sources+3
  • Price verified on pricing page+3
  • 3/3 assessment runs agreed+4
  • Evidence score67

The base comes from the verdict. Everything under it is a check that either happened or did not, and each one is a fact frozen in this record rather than a judgement made at render time - so the same evidence always produces the same number.

How scoring works →

Cited sources · 4

Every page the run actually retrieved.

Integrity checks

What held up, and what did not.

✓ Price read off the page✓ 3 independent runs, one answer✓ Citations limited to fetched pages! 1 moat quoted from the page