Keeping up with AI tools has quietly become a part-time job nobody applied for. There's An AI For That now tracks roughly 47,400 publicly listed tools, and the number goes up every day. You find one that works, spend a weekend learning it, and by Tuesday someone on X is calling your whole workflow prehistoric.
Even the people who live in this stuff are lost. When Ole Lehmann asked which tool is best for creating animations through MCP, it wasn't a beginner's question. It was a very online AI power user admitting that nobody really knows.
And the advice out there is compromised. Most AI tool affiliate programs pay 20-40% recurring commission, so the average "Top 10 AI Tools" listicle is often a ranking of payouts, not performance. Was the tool actually tested? On what task? Would it still be number one without the commission?
Guessing wrong is expensive. 58% of US buyers regret at least one software purchase from the previous 12-18 months, and among regretful retail buyers, 88% were likely to buy based on vendor information alone. The problem isn't a lack of options. It's a lack of anyone doing honest homework.
An independent testing lab for AI tools. Think Wirecutter for your AI stack, with receipts.
The rule that makes the whole thing work: buyers fund the research, vendors can't buy a better ranking.
Market size