A directory can have hundreds of links and still leave you wondering what to click.
That's something I've been thinking about while working on AINavly, a curated directory of useful projects from around the web. Despite the name, it isn't only about AI. There are plenty of small web apps and browser games worth discovering, too.
The question I'm trying to answer isn't "How many tools can I list?" It's "Can someone look at an entry and quickly decide whether this is worth their time?"
Here's what belongs in the collection, and how I think about choosing it.
1. AI tools with a clear job to do
AI is the obvious starting point, but "uses AI" isn't a useful category by itself.
I'm interested in tools that help with specific tasks:
- Chat and research: ChatGPT, Claude, and Perplexity represent different ways to ask questions, work through ideas, or find sources.
- Coding: Cursor and newer AI coding products belong here when there's a clear development workflow to explain.
- Images and creative work: Midjourney and other visual tools are easier to evaluate when you know what kind of output you're trying to make.
- Writing and productivity: Tools such as Notion AI are most useful when their role in an existing workflow is clear.
The directory's submission categories also make room for AI video, audio, writing, agents, marketing, and model APIs. That doesn't mean every category is equally full today; it's the scope of projects I want to be able to evaluate.
2. Small web apps that solve surprisingly specific problems
Some of the most interesting projects don't need an AI label at all.
A browser-based embroidery lettering tool, a digital flower-gift builder, or a controller calibration utility might serve a narrow audience. But if it solves a real problem, that's enough reason to look closer.
Projects already featured on AINavly include Stitch Typewriter, Bloomify, Learn Arduino, and DualShock Calibration GUI. They don't all belong to the same industry, and that's the point: usefulness is more important than fitting a trendy label.
For this group, I want to explain what someone can actually do on the site, whether it requires an account, and what limitations to check before investing time in it.
3. Browser games and unusual interactive projects
I also include games that run in the browser.
They range from quick experiments to more involved projects: CrazyCattle3D, Brisbane Streets, Busy Nurse, and Mela Chaloge are a few examples in the current collection.
Game listings need different information from productivity tools. Instead of promising that something will "boost efficiency," they should tell you things like:
- What kind of game is it?
- Can you play immediately, or is setup required?
- What controls, languages, or save options are available?
- Is this the original project, a fan-made version, or an unofficial mirror?
Sometimes knowing what not to expect is the most useful part of a listing.
4. Projects can come from anywhere
A useful tool doesn't have to live on a polished company domain. Interesting projects show up on Vercel, GitHub Pages, Cloudflare Pages, and independent sites.
That creates a discovery problem: two projects may have similar names, one might have moved, and another might be an outdated demo. A directory should help people find the right destination, not just repeat whatever URL happens to rank in search.
AINavly's main site covers projects across the wider web. There's also a sister directory focused more specifically on Vercel-hosted discoveries. The overlap is intentional, but each listing should be written for the audience using that directory.
5. What makes a project worth listing?
I don't think a listing should be just a logo, a one-line pitch, and a button.
These are the questions I try to answer:
- What does it actually do? Give a concrete use case, not a collection of buzzwords.
- How do you start? Explain the basic steps or access requirements.
- What should users know first? Mention pricing, language limitations, privacy considerations, or anything else that affects the decision.
- Is the source clear? Link to the relevant official project and distinguish it from lookalikes when necessary.
- What are the alternatives? Give readers enough context to choose, rather than pushing them toward a single option.
Submissions are reviewed rather than automatically published. Broken links, duplicates, misleading claims, and harmful projects aren't the kind of entries I want to add just to grow a number on the homepage.
6. The hard part is keeping the directory useful
Adding a new card is easy. Keeping it useful after a project changes its name, pricing, features, or URL is the real work.
That's why I think when something was added, when its description was updated, and when its source was checked are different pieces of information. A recent editorial edit doesn't automatically mean every product claim was retested.
I'm still learning what makes a directory genuinely useful, but one lesson is already clear: the number of links isn't the product. The context around those links is.
If you've built or regularly used a tool directory, what information do you look for before opening a project you've never heard of?
Top comments (0)