Build Apps Without Code

Verified against Bolt.new · 2026-07-26

Turn a Figma design or screenshot into a working prototype

A Bolt.new brief for recreating a static Figma frame or screenshot as a working prototype, with a hard rule that anything not visible in the source gets flagged as a gap, never quietly invented and presented as a match.

Bolt.new7 fillable variables

The prompt

Ready to copy — highlighted parts are example details you can swap.

Recreate the attached design as a working, responsive web prototype in Bolt.new. Match it closely — this is a fidelity exercise, not "get the general idea across."

DESIGN SOURCE
a Figma file link with 4 frames: Landing, Pricing, Login, and Dashboard, all at desktop 1440px width

WHAT'S ACTUALLY IN THE DESIGN
The design shows Landing, Pricing, Login, and Dashboard, each at one desktop breakpoint only. Treat anything not shown in it as genuinely unspecified — do not invent a mobile layout, an empty state, or a hover state that isn't visible in the source and present it as if it came from the design; build only what's shown, and flag every gap you had to fill in separately from the parts that are a direct match.

FIDELITY RULES
Match spacing, type scale, and color as closely as the source allows — primary #1A73E8, text #1F2937, background #F9FAFB — pulled directly from the Figma inspector panel if you have exact hex values, use them exactly; if you're estimating from a screenshot, say which values are estimates rather than presenting a guessed color as if it were specified. Match the actual layout structure — if the design uses a 12-column grid with specific gutters, build that grid, don't approximate it with a generic flex layout that happens to look similar at one viewport width and diverges at others. Reproduce real component states shown in the source (a button's hover or disabled state, an input's error state) exactly as shown — if the source only shows one state of a given element, note that as a gap rather than inventing the other states from a generic design-system instinct.

RESPONSIVE BEHAVIOR
The source is a single static Figma frame at 1440px, which by definition only shows one breakpoint. For breakpoints not shown at all, apply these explicit rules rather than guessing: stack any multi-column section to a single column below 768px, keep the nav collapsing into a hamburger menu below 900px. State plainly, screen by screen, what you had to decide for a breakpoint the source didn't cover, so it's clear which parts of the responsive behavior are a real match to a design decision and which are your own reasonable default.

INTERACTIVITY
Login should navigate to Dashboard on submit with any input; Pricing CTA buttons should scroll to or navigate to Login Anything clickable in the design that doesn't have a defined destination in this brief should navigate somewhere plausible within the prototype rather than being a dead link — but note every destination you had to invent so it can be corrected.

CONSTRAINTS
Use React with Tailwind CSS. Keep the DOM structure reasonably semantic — real headings, real button and link elements — rather than a wall of generic divs with inline styles, since a prototype this close to final should be able to become production code with normal cleanup, not a full rewrite. Name the actual font family if it's identifiable in the source, or say explicitly that you substituted a close system-font equivalent because the real one couldn't be confirmed from a static image alone.

Customize

Optional — swap in your own details for the highlighted parts above.

Why this works

The explicit distinction between "shown in the source" and "invented" targets a specific and common failure of design-to-code generation: when a model is asked to "match this design" from a single static frame, it fills every gap the source doesn't cover with plausible-looking defaults and presents the entire result with equal confidence, so a reviewer comparing the output to the original can't tell which parts are a real match and which are the model's own invention until they go pixel-hunting through it. Requiring the gaps to be named separately turns an unverifiable "looks about right" into a checklist a designer can actually review line by line. Distinguishing exact hex values from estimated colors addresses a concrete accuracy gap: a color sampled by a model from a compressed screenshot or a rendered preview image is an estimate, not a measurement, and can be off by enough to fail a brand-consistency check even though it looks identical to the eye on a different monitor's color profile. Explicitly separating "given exact values" from "estimated from the image" is what stops a plausible-looking guess from being treated as a specification someone might later rely on for an actual brand asset. Naming explicit responsive rules for viewports the static source doesn't show closes the single largest gap in any static-image-to-prototype workflow: a Figma frame or screenshot is definitionally one viewport width, so anything about how the layout behaves at any other width is not actually "in the design" at all — it was never specified by anyone. A model not told this will invent a mobile layout from generic responsive-design instinct and present it with the same confidence as the parts genuinely traced from the source, when it's really a separate design decision nobody has actually made yet, and treating it as equally authoritative to the traced parts is exactly the kind of confusion this prompt's gap-flagging rule exists to prevent.

Verified against

Bolt.new Bolt.new web app (StackBlitz WebContainers) · 2026-07-26

Changelog

  • 2026-07-26 Initial publish, verified against Bolt.new with an explicit shown-versus-invented distinction for every unspecified breakpoint and state.

Need this built into your business?

If a prompt isn't enough — custom software, built and maintained for you — that's Scult's day job.

EXPLORE CUSTOM SOFTWARE
All Build Apps Without Code prompts

Check your AI visibility

One URL in, a 0–100 score and the exact fixes out.

RUN THE CHECK

Browse all the tools

15 tools across six categories
13 of them never send your data anywhere

Free · No signup · No trial clock

SEE THE DIRECTORY