Free AI tool submission

What you get, for nothing

• A real editorial review by a human, against the same bar every tool faces.
• A full listing — no reduced free tier, no locked fields, no upsell to “claim your profile”.
• Continuous maintenance. Of the 8,155 tools published here, 100% have had their stored facts re-checked in the last 30 days and 100% had every published link re-probed in the last 7, and that applies to free listings exactly as it does to paid ones.
• Inclusion in everything downstream: category pages, comparisons, the stack planner, and the data we publish for AI assistants to read.

What “maintained” actually means

Most places you can list a tool take your description once and never look at it again. Two quarters later the pricing is wrong, the free tier is gone, and the page is quietly telling buyers something untrue about you. An assistant that reads it repeats the error. Here, three separate cycles run against every published listing, yours included, whether or not you ever pay us anything:

• Availability probe — every published link (website, docs, changelog, repository) re-probed: 100% within the last 7 days, none older than 30 days.
• Record verification — the stored facts re-checked: 87.3% within 7 days (7,121 of 8,155), 100% within 30 days.
• Deep content refresh — pricing tiers, specs, "what's new" feeds, viability scores and editorial sections re-synthesised: 41.3% within 7 days.

Read from the catalogue when you loaded this page, not typed into it. On a bad week these numbers drop and the page says so.

There is a second half to it: when a tool dies, we notice. Links are re-probed, dead products are marked and unpublished, and the catalogue does not fill up with abandoned entries. That is worth as much to you as your own listing — being compared against six tools that shut down last year helps nobody.

Why the free lane exists

We need something a small platform cannot buy: a catalogue worth searching. Charging for every review would shrink it to whoever happened to feel urgent that week, which is not a catalogue — it is an ad board with a search box. Every approved tool makes the catalogue more useful to the buyers who search it, and that usefulness is the only asset here that compounds.

This lane used to ask for a link in return. It no longer does, for two reasons worth stating plainly. A link given in exchange for a review is a paid link under Google’s own policy and has to be marked as one, so it never carried the value it appeared to. And the requirement quietly stranded people: submissions that placed no link sat in a queue nobody looked at, which is a bad way to treat someone who has already done the work. Reviews are now funded by the vendors who choose to pay for speed, and nothing else is asked of anyone.

The honest catch

You wait longer, you sit behind paid submissions in the review queue, and your page is built after theirs once approved. That is the entire catch, and we would rather write it plainly than have you submit and wonder why nothing is happening. Reviewer time is the one genuinely scarce thing here — paying is how somebody moves up the queue, and it is what funds the reviews nobody pays for. Nobody is penalised for not paying, and nothing about the listing you end up with is different.