标签：#tools

Stop memorizing ANSI escape sequences. I built a browser tool to generate them visually — pick colors, styles, and get the code ready to paste. Try it 🔗 ANSI Color Code Generator — DevNestio Features 3 color modes : 8-color, 256-color palette, RGB truecolor (24-bit) 8 text styles : Bold, Dim, Italic, Underline, Blink, Reverse, Hidden, Strikethrough Separate FG/BG : Set foreground and background colors independently 3 output formats : Shell ( echo -e ), Python ( print ), Raw escape sequence Live preview in a simulated terminal box How ANSI sequences work ESC [ <codes> m Multiple codes are separated by ; . Reset is ESC[0m . 8-color : codes 30-37 (FG), 40-47 (BG), 90-97 (bright FG) 256-color : ESC[38;5;<0-255>m for FG, ESC[48;5;<0-255>m for BG RGB truecolor : ESC[38;2;<R>;<G>;<B>m 256-color palette calculation function get256Color ( i ) { if ( i < 16 ) return standardColors [ i ]. hex ; if ( i < 232 ) { const n = i - 16 ; const r = Math . floor ( n / 36 ) * 51 ; // 255/5 = 51 const g = Math . floor (( n % 36 ) / 6 ) * 51 ; const b = ( n % 6 ) * 51 ; return `rgb( ${ r } , ${ g } , ${ b } )` ; } const v = ( i - 232 ) * 10 + 8 ; // 24 grayscale steps return `rgb( ${ v } , ${ v } , ${ v } )` ; } Output examples # Bold red text on black echo -e " \e [1;31mHello, Terminal! \e [0m" # RGB orange (Python) print ( " \0 33[38;2;255;128;0mOrange text \0 33[0m" ) Tested with 128 assertions covering code generation, color math, and format strings. Part of DevNestio — 115 free browser-only developer tools.

I built a browser-based bitwise calculator that performs AND, OR, XOR, NOT, NAND, NOR, XNOR, arithmetic/logical shifts, and rotate operations on 32-bit integers — with a live clickable bit grid. Try it 🔗 Bitwise Calculator — DevNestio Features 13 operations : AND, OR, XOR, NOT A/B, NAND, NOR, XNOR, SHL, SHR, SHRA, ROTL, ROTR Visual 32-bit grid : Click any bit to toggle Operand A on the fly Multi-base input : Auto-detect 0xFF , 0b1010 , 0o17 , or decimal 4 output formats : Hex, decimal, binary (grouped), octal — all with copy buttons No server, no upload — everything runs in-browser The JavaScript integer trap Bitwise ops in JS coerce values to signed 32-bit integers. To get unsigned results you need >>> 0 : case NOT_A : return ( ~ a ) >>> 0 ; // without >>> 0, ~0 shows as -1 case XNOR : return ( ~ ( a ^ b )) >>> 0 ; case ROTL : return (( a << s ) | ( a >>> ( 32 - s ))) >>> 0 ; Rotate without a dedicated instruction JavaScript has no ROL/ROR, so combine two shifts: // Rotate left by s bits (( a << s ) | ( a >>> ( 32 - s ))) >>> 0 Tested with 99 assertions All core logic — parsing, computing, edge cases like XNOR with ~0xFF = 0xFFFFFF00 — covered in a Node.js test file using assert . Part of DevNestio — a growing collection of 115 free browser-only developer tools.

Shared mailboxes for teams and AI agents Discussion | Link

Shared, searchable memory for every AI coding agent Discussion | Link

Quick, creative video subtitling with direct canvas control Discussion | Link

Turn to-dos into scheduled tasks Discussion | Link

HTTP cookies are everywhere in authentication, sessions, and tracking — but reading Set-Cookie headers manually is tedious. I built a free, browser-only HTTP Cookie Inspector that parses cookie strings and gives you a security analysis. Live Tool 👉 https://devnestio.pages.dev/cookie-inspector/ What it does Parse Set-Cookie strings — extract all attributes at a glance Attribute cards — name, value, expires/max-age, domain, path, Secure, HttpOnly, SameSite Security score (0–100) — +25 for Secure, +25 for HttpOnly, +25 for SameSite≠None, +25 for expiry XSS/CSRF risk flags — warns when HttpOnly or SameSite is missing Syntax highlighted raw header — color-coded by attribute type Presets — session, persistent, secure+httponly, SameSite=Strict, minimal 100% client-side — no data leaves your browser Cookie security flags explained Flag Missing risk Present benefit Secure Cookie sent over HTTP Only sent over HTTPS HttpOnly JS can steal it (XSS) Inaccessible via document.cookie SameSite=Strict CSRF attacks possible Never sent on cross-site requests SameSite=Lax Partial CSRF risk Sent on top-level nav only SameSite=None Always cross-site Requires Secure flag SameSite values Set-Cookie: session=abc123; SameSite=Strict; HttpOnly; Secure # Best practice for auth cookies Set-Cookie: prefs=dark; SameSite=Lax # OK for non-sensitive preferences Set-Cookie: embed=true; SameSite=None; Secure # Cross-site embeds (e.g. payment widgets) Testing 84 tests, all passing ✅ Tests cover: Parsing all standard attributes Boolean flags (Secure, HttpOnly) detection SameSite value classification Max-Age duration calculation Security score computation XSS/CSRF warning logic All preset templates HTML escaping in output UI elements and copy functionality All tools at devnestio.pages.dev — free browser-only developer utilities.

Debugging JWT authentication usually means copying tokens between tabs and tools. I built a free, browser-only JWT Creator & Signer — create, sign, and verify JWTs entirely in your browser using the Web Crypto API. Live Tool 👉 https://devnestio.pages.dev/jwt-creator/ What it does Create JWTs — edit header (alg, typ) and payload (any JSON) Sign with HMAC — HS256, HS384, or HS512 Quick claim buttons — insert sub , name , exp (+1h), iss with one click Generate random secrets — 256-bit hex secret via crypto.getRandomValues() Verify existing JWTs — paste any token and verify signature + expiry Color-coded output — header in red, payload in green, signature in blue 100% client-side — Web Crypto API, no server, your secrets stay local How signing works (Web Crypto API) const key = await crypto . subtle . importKey ( " raw " , new TextEncoder (). encode ( secret ), { name : " HMAC " , hash : " SHA-256 " }, false , [ " sign " ] ); const sig = await crypto . subtle . sign ( " HMAC " , key , new TextEncoder (). encode ( header + " . " + payload ) ); The output is base64url-encoded (replacing + → - , / → _ , stripping = padding) to form the final JWT. Why browser-only matters for a JWT tool JWT secrets are sensitive. Any tool that sends your signing secret to a server is a liability. This tool never sends anything — the Web Crypto API runs entirely inside your browser tab. Testing 77 tests, all passing ✅ Tests cover: Base64url encoding edge cases JWT structure (3-part dot-separated) HMAC algorithm mapping (HS256 → SHA-256 etc.) Expiry check (expired vs. valid tokens) Error states: invalid JSON payload, malformed JWT UI: claim insertion, secret toggle, copy, clear Web Crypto API usage verification All tools at devnestio.pages.dev — free browser-only developer utilities. Feedback welcome!

A full form backend you can test before paying Discussion | Link

Native code switching, better diarization, more languages. Discussion | Link

Connect your AI agent to postal mail Discussion | Link

Preserving authentic organic posting since the collapse. Discussion | Link

Turn 1 creative into every ad format, instantly Discussion | Link

Vendor onboarding usually starts with one clean request and then turns into a messy thread. Procurement asks for a W-9, security asks for a SOC 2 report, finance asks for remittance details, legal asks for an executed agreement, and the vendor replies with four attachments across three messages because different people own different parts of the process. That is exactly the kind of workflow where a generic "AI email assistant" gets risky. You do not want a model improvising legal language, requesting bank details in the wrong channel, or forwarding a confidential report to the wrong internal alias. You want the agent to own the repetitive coordination while your application keeps the state machine, policy, audit log, and approvals. The pattern I reach for is a dedicated Nylas Agent Account: vendors@yourcompany.com . It is a real mailbox the onboarding agent owns. It receives the vendor's replies, detects what is attached, updates your vendor record, sends safe reminders, and escalates missing or sensitive items to a human. The agent is not borrowing an employee's inbox, and it is not scraping a shared procurement mailbox. It has a grant, an email address, webhooks, threads, folders, and the same Messages API you would use for any other mailbox. I work on the Nylas CLI, so the terminal examples below use the commands I would use while building and debugging this flow. I also include the raw API calls because the production version belongs in your service, not in a shell script. What the agent should own Start by drawing the boundary tightly. A vendor onboarding agent should own message handling and coordination, not business approval. Good responsibilities: Receive vendor replies at a stable address. Read message bodies and attachment metadata. Match a reply to an existing vendor record. Detect which onboarding items are complete, missing, expired, or unreadable. Draft reminders and status updates. Schedule handoff calls when the vendor asks for help. Escalate sensit

We started using Jira to manage our internal development workflow. At first it worked fine, but once we outgrew the free tier, the cost became hard to justify. At $15 per user per month, we were suddenly looking at a bill that did not match how we actually used the product. What we Built We created WannaTrack, a lightweight project management tool designed for small dev teams that do not need enterprise complexity. The goal was not to recreate Jira. It was to remove everything we did not use. Key ideas : minimal agile board with no clutter or heavy configuration simple issue tracking flow fast interface for daily development work minimal setup and no onboarding overhead Migration from Jira One of the biggest concerns was switching tools without breaking our workflow. So we built a Jira import tool that lets you migrate existing tickets into WannaTrack without manual effort. This allowed us to switch internally without downtime. Where it is now We now use WannaTrack daily for our own development workflow and are opening it up to other teams who feel the same pain with traditional tools. If you are a small dev team, indie hacker, or startup looking for a simpler issue tracker without overhead, you can check it out here: https://wannatrack.com

Debug AI agents by replaying and forking runs Discussion | Link

Talk to your to do list and get what's next Discussion | Link

Give Your AI Superpowers on macOS Discussion | Link

This week was largely a Claude story: Sonnet 5 landed with enough benchmark muscle to make Opus feel redundant for most workloads, and GitLab's production data backs up the claims. Alongside that, GitHub Copilot quietly dropped its JetBrains friction, and Google's image model got cheaper and faster on Vercel's gateway. Here's what's worth acting on. Claude Sonnet 5 launches on Vercel AI Gateway Sonnet 5 is available now via Vercel AI Gateway at anthropic/claude-sonnet-5 . Launch pricing is $2/$10 per million input/output tokens—identical to Sonnet 4.6—but that rate expires August 31, after which it steps to $3/$15. The model matches Opus 4.8 on coding and agentic benchmarks, which means you can stop routing hard tasks to Opus and absorb a 50–67% cost reduction in the process. For AI SDK users, this is a one-line change. Stronger long-context handling and document parsing are the practical wins for RAG pipelines and multi-turn agent workflows—two areas where Sonnet 4.6 had real rough edges. Verdict: Ship. Update your model identifier before August 31 while the launch pricing holds. Zero breaking changes, and there's no reason to stay on 4.6 for new work. Sonnet 5 closes Opus gap at lower cost Beyond the Vercel integration, the broader Sonnet 5 release deserves its own read. The model is now the default reasoning tier replacing Sonnet 4.6 across Anthropic's plans, and the capability jump is specifically on agentic task completion—planning, multi-step tool use, brownfield code navigation. Early testers report that tasks which previously stalled midway through agent loops now finish end-to-end, which is a qualitatively different outcome from incremental benchmark gains. The economics are straightforward: Opus-level performance at Sonnet prices through August, then a modest step up to $3/$15. If you're running production agents today, the cost-per-completed-task improvement compounds because you're paying less and spending fewer cycles on failure recovery and re-promptin

Real-time structured search trusted by agents and developers Discussion | Link