32slop score / 100
Suspiciously Clean
Is flowinvoice.app built or slop?
Slopdar scanned flowinvoice.app and gave it a Slop Score of 32/100 (Suspiciously Clean). 5 AI / vibe-coding tells were found. These are signals, not proof.
“Suspiciously clean. Either a careful human, or a very careful prompt.”
Caught on camera
The usual suspects
BootstrapCloudflareNext.jsTailwind CSS
The receipts
5 tells found01
Placeholder brand name+16
Template placeholders like "Your Company" / "Acme" remain.
Leftover junk
02
AI marketing buzzwords+12
Clusters of "elevate / seamless / supercharge"-style filler.
Copy tell
03
Radix UI primitives+10
Radix UI primitives (the shadcn/ui foundation) were detected.
Default asset
04
Stock Next.js setup+6
Next.js with no apparent customisation of the default scaffold.
Default asset
05
Three-feature-card grid+6
The hero-plus-three-cards layout AI builders default to.
Layout tell
Signs a human was here
✓
Real site pages-8
Links to genuine pages (about, blog, pricing, docs) suggest real effort.
Human signal
✓
Considered metadata-4
A real meta description plus Open Graph tags show care.
Human signal
✓
Custom typography-3
Self-hosted or custom web fonts, not just system defaults.
Human signal
✓
Custom favicon-3
A real, non-default favicon, a small sign someone cared.
Human signal
Slopdar reports signals, not proof. A high score means a site smells templated, not that no human was ever involved.