Describe the site you need in a few plain sentences and Supercomputer, the agent chat in Picasso IA, plans the pages, writes the copy and renders the images in one conversation. You get a draft to review, steer with follow-up messages and export when it is right.
A small business site needs a handful of pages, words for each of them and pictures that fit, and those three jobs usually land on three different people with three different timelines. Supercomputer, the agent chat in Picasso IA, takes one plain description of the site and builds the pages, the copy and the images together, so you review a draft that already hangs together instead of stitching one from parts.
Most sites stall before the first page exists. The copywriter waits for the structure, the designer waits for the copy, and the photos arrive last, shot for a layout nobody has seen. When all three are produced from the same description, they start out agreeing with each other: the headline on the services page matches the image next to it, and the tone of the about page matches the tone of the footer.
That is the whole pitch, and it is a modest one. You are not getting a finished site. You are getting a draft in the time it takes to read a long email, which is a very different starting point from a blank editor. Reviewing a draft is a much easier job than inventing one, and disagreeing with a draft tells you what you actually want faster than a brainstorm does.
Supercomputer works as a chat in the web app. You describe the result you want, it plans the job, picks models from the catalog of 502, renders the steps and shows you what came out. It uses the same models and the same credit system as the toolkit, so each generation costs credits that depend on the model and the settings, and the pricing page is where the plans live. It needs no API key, because there is nothing to connect: it is a conversation.
The quality of the draft follows the quality of the brief, and the brief is only a few paragraphs. The trick is giving the chat the things it cannot guess: who the site is for, what the visitor should be able to do, and what is true about the business.
A useful description covers five things. Who you are and what you offer, in two sentences. Who visits and what they came to do. Which pages you want, or a note that you want it to propose them. The tone, with an example of a sentence you would say and one you would never say. And the real facts: opening hours, locations, names of services, anything that must be accurate. The chat can write around facts you supply, but it will not know them on its own, and a fluent invented fact is worse than a gap.
Visual direction deserves its own sentence. Say what the pictures should feel like, warm kitchen light or flat studio colour, photographs or illustration, and say what should never appear. If you have a logo, colours or product photos, attach them so the images are built around what already exists. If you are still choosing a look, the logo concepts page shows how to settle a visual identity first, so the site inherits it.
The three outputs are not equally easy to get right, and knowing which needs the most of you saves review time. This table is the honest version of where your attention goes.
| Part | What you give it | What to check in the draft |
|---|---|---|
| Page plan | The goal of the site and who visits | Is anything missing that a visitor would look for, and is anything there only to fill space |
| Copy | Tone, facts and a sample sentence | Every claim, name, number and promise against what is actually true |
| Images | Visual direction and any real photos | Whether they show the real thing, and whether any readable text or odd detail slipped in |
| Legal pages | The country and what data you collect | Treated as a starting outline for a professional to review, never as final wording |
| Accessibility | Nothing, you check it | Contrast, image descriptions, heading order and whether it works without a mouse |
| Consistency | Your corrections, in the chat | Whether a change on one page reached the others that mention it |
Read the table from the bottom up when time is short. Consistency problems are cheap to fix while the draft is still a conversation, and expensive once the pieces have been copied into other tools.
This is the journey from a description to a draft you can review. It assumes a business or a project, ten minutes to write the brief and no API key, since Supercomputer is a chat and not a connector.
Generation takes time and spends credits, and a draft with many images spends more than a draft with few. If you want to test a single piece first, such as the hero image or the opening paragraph, you can run the same prompt in the toolkit today and see what a model does with it.
A draft is only as trustworthy as the person who reads it. This stage is where the work becomes yours, and it is worth planning for, because a smooth-sounding page can be wrong in ways that read perfectly well.
A fluent sentence is not a verified sentence. Read the draft with the original facts open next to it, and treat every number, name, address, certification and promise as unproven until you have matched it to something real.
Start with the facts, because the copy is built to sound confident. Opening hours, prices, guarantees, locations and claims about your own work all need a human check against the truth. Then the legal pages: privacy and terms drafts are outlines at best, the right text depends on your country and on what your site actually collects, and a qualified person should review them. This is general information, not legal advice.
Accessibility needs its own pass. Check that text has enough contrast over the images, that every image has a useful text description, that headings follow a sensible order and that the pages work with a keyboard alone. The images need a truthful eye too: if a picture stands in for your product, your team or your premises, it must not show something you cannot deliver. For selling-focused pages, the product photography page covers keeping pictures honest about the item.
Picasso IA does not host the site, register a domain or publish anything. Taking the reviewed draft live is a step you do with whoever builds and runs your site, which is also where the final review belongs.
A single description gets you a coherent first draft, not a finished product. These are the places where you should expect to do real work, and where the page should not pretend otherwise.
None of this makes the draft useless. It makes it a draft, which is exactly what it is for.
It can build a draft from one description: a plan for the pages, the copy for each and images that match, produced in the same chat. What it does not do is replace the review. You still check the facts, the legal pages and the accessibility, and you still decide what goes live. Think of the prompt as the brief you would send a small studio, with a faster first answer.
No. The result is a draft of pages, copy and images that you review and export. Hosting, domain registration and publishing are separate jobs that you handle with the person or service that runs your site. Keeping those steps outside the draft also means the reviewed version is the thing you choose to publish, instead of something that goes out on its own.
No. Supercomputer is a chat in the web app, so there is nothing to connect and no key to create. You write the description, answer the plan, and steer the result in the conversation. API keys exist for other parts of Picasso IA, but this one needs none, and your account is all you use.
It picks from the catalog of 502 models for each step, and you can see what was used as results arrive. Typically that means a language model for the words and an image model for the pictures, such as gpt-5.2, flux-2-pro, seedream-4.5 or nano-banana-pro. Because the same models are in the toolkit, you can try any of them by hand if you want to compare.
Each generation costs credits, and the amount depends on the model and the settings, so a draft with many images costs more than a short one. New accounts get free credits to start. Current plans and credit packs are on the pricing page, which is the only place worth trusting for numbers, since anything written here would age quickly.
It depends on how many pages there are, how many images each needs and which models are chosen. Generation takes time, and larger drafts take longer, so treat the first run as something you start and then come back to. A fixed duration would be a guess dressed up as a fact, so none is quoted here.
Yes, that is what the same-conversation steering is for. Ask for a different tone on the about page, a new image on the services page or a split of one page into two, and only that part is reworked. After any change, scan the other pages that mention the same thing, because a correction in one place can leave an older version behind in another.
No. Treat them as an outline for a qualified professional to review. Privacy and terms pages depend on your country, on the data your site collects and on the services you use, and generated text cannot know those details. This is general information, not legal advice, and the final wording should be checked by someone who can be accountable for it.
Yes, and for anything that is evidence of what you sell you should. Attach your real product photos, team pictures or logo, and ask for the generated images to match their colours and mood. Generated pictures work well for backgrounds, illustrations and mood, but a picture of your actual product, premises or people should be the real thing.
Say so in the chat, and be specific about what is off: the tone, the page order, the style of the images. The conversation keeps the context, so you refine instead of restarting. If a particular piece keeps missing, test it on its own in the toolkit with a different model, or ask support if something looks broken.
Your site idea does not have to stay a list of notes. Open the toolkit and test the hero image or the opening paragraph with any model today, then bring the brief to Supercomputer.
Choose your language
