Css Specificity
by CSS Design Calc in Other
CSS selector specificity (ids, classes, types) per Selectors Level 4, including :is(), :not(), :where() and :has(); compare two.
https://css-design-calc.x402tookit.com/css-specificity- Price
- $0.02
- per call in USDC
- Uptime
- 64.3%
- last 30 days
- Response time
- 511 ms
- 691 ms slowest 5%
- Last check
- Passed
- 1 h ago, next in 4 h
Reliability
Status and outage history · Atom feed · Watch with other listings
How to call it
GET https://css-design-calc.x402tookit.com/css-specificity
Each call costs $0.02 in USDC on Polygon, paid with the request over x402.
Run a free test callOne unpaid request, the way an agent sends it. You see the payment challenge it gets back. Nothing is charged.
Example request
From the listing.
GET https://css-design-calc.x402tookit.com/css-specificity?compareTo=.link.active&selector=%23main+nav+a.active%3Anot%28.disabled%29Parameters
| Parameter | Type | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
compareTo | string | No | A second selector; says which wins in the cascade (same origin, no !important) |
selector | string | Yes | A selector or comma separated list, e.g. nav ul > li.active a:hover |
Example response
The provider's example. We can't check it without paying.
Example response, 37 lines
{
"asOf": "2026-10-11T14:32:43.396Z",
"comparison": {
"detail": "The first selector is more specific.",
"first": "1,2,2",
"second": "0,2,0",
"winner": "first"
},
"degraded": false,
"disclaimer": "Screening signal computed from the named public source. Not financial, legal or investment advice; provided as is. Verify at the source before acting.",
"highest": "1,2,2",
"highestSelector": "#main nav a.active:not(.disabled)",
"notChecked": [
"inline styles (1,0,0,0 above any selector), !important, cascade layers (@layer), scope and origin, which all outrank specificity",
"source order (the later rule wins on a tie)",
"…3 more"
],
"reasons": [
"Compare left to right: any id beats any number of classes; any class beats any number of types."
],
"selectors": [
{
"a": 1,
"b": 2,
"c": 2,
"classCount": 2,
"idCount": 1,
"selector": "#main nav a.active:not(.disabled)",
"specificity": "1,2,2",
"typeCount": 2
}
],
"source": "CSS Selectors Level 4 section 17 (specificity) rules, computed locally",
"summary": "Specificity 1,2,2 (ids, classes/attributes/pseudo-classes, types/pseudo-elements). Versus 0,2,0: first wins.",
"valid": true,
"verdict": "COMPUTED"
}Call it from code
The curl command shows the payment challenge. The JavaScript and Python versions pay and call, and never pay more than $0.02.
curl: see the payment challenge
# bash or zsh: see the payment challenge. Nothing is charged.
curl -sS -g -i 'https://css-design-calc.x402tookit.com/css-specificity?compareTo=.link.active&selector=%23main+nav+a.active%3Anot%28.disabled%29'
# x402 v2 sends the challenge base64-encoded in the PAYMENT-REQUIRED header (v1 sends it in the body).
# To read the header:
curl -sS -g -o /dev/null -D - 'https://css-design-calc.x402tookit.com/css-specificity?compareTo=.link.active&selector=%23main+nav+a.active%3Anot%28.disabled%29' \
| grep -i '^payment-required:' | cut -d' ' -f2 | tr -d '\r' | base64 --decodeJavaScript: pay and call
// npm i @x402/fetch @x402/evm viem
import { wrapFetchWithPayment, x402Client } from "@x402/fetch";
import { registerExactEvmScheme } from "@x402/evm/exact/client";
import { privateKeyToAccount } from "viem/accounts";
// Pays at most $0.02 per call.
const client = new x402Client().setSpendControls({ maxAmountPerPayment: "$0.02" });
registerExactEvmScheme(client, { signer: privateKeyToAccount(process.env.EVM_PRIVATE_KEY) });
const pay = wrapFetchWithPayment(fetch, client);
// Not sure it's safe to pay? ToolVet checks it first for $0.005. Pay for that from a separate
// client: this one is capped at $0.02 per payment. GET https://toolvet.app/api/v1/check?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcss-design-calc.x402tookit.com%2Fcss-specificity
const res = await pay("https://css-design-calc.x402tookit.com/css-specificity?compareTo=.link.active&selector=%23main+nav+a.active%3Anot%28.disabled%29");
console.log(res.status, await res.text());Python: pay and call
# pip install "x402[requests,evm]"
import os
from eth_account import Account
from x402 import x402ClientSync
from x402.http.clients import x402_requests
from x402.mechanisms.evm import EthAccountSigner
from x402.mechanisms.evm.exact.register import register_exact_evm_client
# Pays at most $0.02 per call.
client = x402ClientSync().set_spend_controls({"max_amount_per_payment": "$0.02"})
register_exact_evm_client(client, EthAccountSigner(Account.from_key(os.environ["EVM_PRIVATE_KEY"])))
with x402_requests(client) as session:
res = session.get("https://css-design-calc.x402tookit.com/css-specificity?compareTo=.link.active&selector=%23main+nav+a.active%3Anot%28.disabled%29")
print(res.status_code, res.text)Security scan
No findings
We scan names, descriptions and tool definitions for hidden instructions and other prompt-injection patterns.
Recent checks
| When | Result | HTTP | Time | Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 h ago | Passed | 402 | 566 ms | $0.02 |
| 15 h ago | Passed | 402 | 560 ms | $0.02 |
| 47 h ago | Expected HTTP 402, got 530 | 530 | 211 ms | - |
| 3 days ago | Expected HTTP 402, got 530 | 530 | 99 ms | - |
| 4 days ago | Expected HTTP 402, got 530 | 530 | 111 ms | - |
Show 9 older checks
| 5 days ago | Expected HTTP 402, got 530 | 530 | 216 ms | - |
| 5 days ago | Expected HTTP 402, got 530 | 530 | 251 ms | - |
| 5 days ago | Passed | 402 | 511 ms | $0.02 |
| 5 days ago | Passed | 402 | 204 ms | $0.02 |
| 6 days ago | Passed | 402 | 691 ms | $0.02 |
| 6 days ago | Passed | 402 | 549 ms | $0.02 |
| 6 days ago | Passed | 402 | 313 ms | $0.02 |
| 6 days ago | Passed | 402 | 492 ms | $0.02 |
| 7 days ago | Passed | 402 | 182 ms | $0.02 |