Most AI subscriptions are bought on a demo and cancelled three months later. These are the questions that actually predict whether a tool survives contact with your real work.
Applies to all 221 tools in this directory · reviewed 2026-09-18
A buying guide for AI tools: evaluate on your own task, check the data terms before the features, model the real cost of the pricing unit, and treat free tiers as evaluation rather than production. Applies to all 221 tools listed on AI Supermarket.
Every AI product is demonstrated on a task it was tuned for. The only evaluation that predicts anything is running it on your actual input — your documents, your codebase, your language, your edge cases.
Pick three real examples: one typical, one hard, and one you already know the correct answer to. The third is the most important, because it is the only way to catch a tool that is fluent and wrong. If you cannot get a trial on your own data, that is itself the answer.
This is the question that disqualifies tools fastest, and it is usually answered on a page nobody reads. Four things to establish:
If the answers are not published, assume the least favourable reading. A vendor that will not state its data terms has told you something.
AI pricing units are deliberately hard to compare. Before committing, work out what one month of your actual usage costs:
The trap is a cheap unit price on a unit you will consume far more of than you expect.
Free tiers exist to create a habit and then interrupt it. That is a rational business model, not a trick — but it means building a production process on one is a bet that the limits will not change. They change regularly.
Use the free allowance to run your three test cases, then decide. 36 tools in this directory publish their exact free allowance, which makes that evaluation faster — see what you actually get for free.
The cost of an AI tool is not the subscription; it is the subscription plus the work of leaving. Ask how you get your data out and in what format. If the answer involves exporting from a proprietary store you cannot query, the switching cost is the real price.
This matters most for anything that accumulates your content — transcripts, generated assets, knowledge bases, automation workflows. A tool you cannot leave cheaply is a tool that will raise its price.
Public model rankings reshuffle monthly, measure tasks you do not have, and say nothing about the interface, the integration or the data terms — which is where most of your experience will actually come from.
It is also worth remembering that capability differences between the leading models are small relative to the differences between a tool that fits your workflow and one that does not.
General assistants now do a competent version of a great many narrow tasks. A specialist tool has to justify itself with something a general assistant cannot provide: access to live data, workflow integration, a compliance posture, or output that is consistently in your brand's voice.
If you cannot name which of those four you are buying, you are probably buying a general assistant with a narrower interface. That is not always wrong — but it should be a decision, not a default.
Every tool in this directory fails in a characteristic way, and each department page documents the specific ones. The general pattern is worth internalising: AI tools fail confidently. A wrong answer reads exactly like a right one, which means the review step is not optional and cannot be skipped when you are busy.
Ask, before you buy: who checks the output, and what happens when nobody has time? If the answer is "nobody", the tool is not ready for that workflow.
Each of the 21 department guides applies these questions to a specific field, with the tools compared side by side and the domain-specific pitfalls listed. Browse all departments.
Reviewed 2026-09-18. This guide is general information, not professional advice — for legal, medical, financial or HR decisions the regulatory context on each department page applies. Independent directory — not affiliated with the tools listed.