Lindy
Lindy is a platform for building AI agents that do real work across your existing tools. Each agent, a Lindy, is set up in plain language rather than code: describe the job, connect the apps it needs, such as email, calendar, a CRM or Slack, and set the rules it must follow.
Agents run on triggers rather than waiting to be asked. Typical deployments triage and draft email, schedule and reschedule meetings, prepare briefs before calls, take notes and send follow-ups, keep HubSpot or Salesforce records current and chase leads. A library of prebuilt templates covers the common jobs, so a first agent is usually assembled rather than designed.
Lindy has moved from a free-plan model to subscription tiers with a short trial, and now presents itself as an AI assistant for the whole work loop rather than a single-purpose bot. It suits people who want delegation, not another dashboard.
- Cost
- Paid only
- Ease
- Model
- Hosted service
- Checked
- August 2026
Prices, plans and model versions change fast: this is a mid-2026 snapshot; check the tool's official site for the latest.
Best for
- Delegating whole jobs such as inbox triage or meeting scheduling to an agent
- Building agents in plain language without code or flowcharts
- Keeping CRM records current from email and meeting activity
- Meeting preparation, notes and follow-ups handled end to end
- Starting from prebuilt agent templates rather than a blank canvas
Less suited to
Lindy is less suited to deterministic, high-volume pipeline automation where the same steps must execute identically every time; classic workflow tools remain the better fit there. Costs also scale with how much your agents actually do, so always-on automation deserves a look at plan allowances first.
Because agents act on real email, calendars and customer records, they also need the same onboarding care as a new assistant: clear rules, narrow scope to start, and review while trust builds.
Costs & data, in short
Usage-based pricing per agent task; light delegation is cheap, always-on agents are a running bill.
Agents hold live access to email, calendar and connected tools; grant scopes per agent, per job.
Plans
| Plus | $49.99per month |
|---|---|
| Pro | $99.99per month |
| Max | $199.99per month |
| Enterprise | Price on applicationno list price published |
Prices as of August 2026. Prices and plans change regularly. Check with the provider before you buy.
In practice
How Lindy is used, area by area.
Jobs
AI agents & automation
Describing a job in plain language is a lower bar than drawing a flowchart. That is the practical difference this platform makes to somebody who wants work taken off their desk but has no intention of building a workflow: you set out what the job is, connect the tools it needs, state the rules it must follow, and the agent runs on triggers rather than waiting to be asked.
The jobs it takes on are the recognisable administrative loop. Triaging and drafting email, scheduling and rescheduling, preparing briefs before calls, taking notes and sending follow-ups, keeping customer records current, chasing leads that went quiet. Templates cover the common ones, so the first agent is usually assembled rather than designed, which is what makes the starting point cheap in effort.
It is for founders, sales people and operators whose bottleneck is administrative rather than technical, and who would rather delegate an outcome than specify every step.
Example tasks
- Delegate inbox triage and first-draft replies to an always-on agent
- Hand over meeting scheduling and rescheduling across connected calendars
- Prepare briefing notes before calls without assembling them yourself
- Keep customer records current from email and meeting activity
- Start from a template and narrow an agent's scope while trust builds
Limits
Deterministic, high-volume pipelines belong on the classic workflow platforms, where the same steps must execute identically every time and judgement is a liability rather than a feature.
Costs also scale with how much the agents actually do, so always-on delegation deserves a look at plan allowances before it runs unattended. Because agents act on real email, calendars and customer records, they need the same care as a new assistant: narrow scope to begin with, explicit rules, and review while trust is still being earned.
Compares
| vs | Pick Lindy when | Pick the other when |
|---|---|---|
| ZapierFull comparison → | Lindy asks for a description of the job rather than a diagram of it, which fits the person who has tried workflow builders and stalled | the first automation should take an afternoon rather than a project, with no server to choose and no framework to learn |
| MakeFull comparison → | Lindy starts from a template, so the first agent is usually assembled rather than designed and the familiar administrative loop is covered on day one | the branching, iteration and error paths have to be drawn rather than worked around |
| Relevance AIFull comparison → | Lindy delegates inbox triage and first-draft replies to an always-on agent, which is one recognisable job rather than a function | the unit of work is a function and the coverage should be sized in roles rather than workflows |
| n8nFull comparison → | Lindy hands over meeting scheduling and rescheduling across connected calendars and prepares the briefing notes before a call | the team can run and update a server and its data-location requirements came from outside engineering |
| LangChain / LangGraphFull comparison → | the agent is already running when the trigger arrives rather than waiting to be asked, so the administrative loop comes off the desk without anybody starting it | the system is complex enough that control and observability matter more than speed to a first version |
| BardeenFull comparison → | nobody has to be at the machine: the work fires on its own trigger and the administrative loop simply stops arriving, though an agent touching real email and calendars deserves a narrow scope while trust is still being earned | the repetitive work is research and collection in the browser and the alternative is doing it by hand |
| GumloopFull comparison → | there is no batch and no end to it: customer records are kept current out of email and meeting activity as that activity happens, and the lead that went quiet gets chased without anybody noticing it had | the job arrives as a folder of documents and drawing the pipeline is preferable to describing the outcome |
Productivity & personal assistant
Recurring admin is the tax on a professional's day
Recurring admin is the tax on a professional's day, and Lindy takes it on. You describe a job in plain language, triage the inbox, schedule and reschedule meetings, prep a brief before a call, connect the apps it needs, and the agent runs on its own triggers rather than waiting to be asked. For a professional buried in recurring admin, that is delegation without a hire.
Agents start from templates and act across email, calendar, a CRM or Slack, so the routine parts of a day run themselves. The individual who loses hours to scheduling and inbox churn, and is ready to let an agent own those, gains the most.
Example tasks
- Hand inbox triage or scheduling to an agent that acts on its own
- Set up an agent in plain language, no flowcharts
- Prepare a briefing before every call automatically
- Keep CRM records current from email and meetings
- Start from a prebuilt agent template and adjust the rules
Limits
Lindy is less suited to deterministic, high-volume pipeline automation where the same steps must execute identically every time, which is classic workflow-tool ground. Costs scale with how much your agents run, so a heavy deployment needs sizing, and an agent acting in your name wants oversight until you trust its judgement.
Compares
| vs | Pick Lindy when | Pick the other when |
|---|---|---|
| ZapierFull comparison → | Lindy treats recurring admin as the tax on a professional's day and takes it on, with agents acting across email, calendar, a CRM or Slack so the routine parts run themselves | the apps simply have to connect, nobody will maintain infrastructure and speed beats cost per task |
Tasks
Automation & agents
Lindy packages automation as employees rather than workflows
Lindy packages automation as employees rather than workflows. You describe a job in plain language, connect the tools it needs, and the agent triages the inbox, schedules meetings, updates the CRM or chases leads with its own judgement inside the rules you set, running on triggers and acting across connected apps rather than inside a chat window, with templates so a working agent is minutes away. The framing is the point: you delegate outcomes, not steps, which suits founders, sales teams and operators whose bottleneck is that administrative loop. Its judgement is a feature where variation is acceptable and a liability where it is not, so deterministic high-volume pipelines belong on the classic workflow tools, costs scale with how much the agents do, and new agents deserve narrow scope and review while trust builds.
Example tasks
- Triage the inbox and draft replies for review
- Schedule, reschedule and coordinate meetings across calendars
- Prepare briefs before calls and send follow-ups afterwards
- Keep HubSpot or Salesforce updated from email and meeting activity
- Run lead follow-up sequences with human checkpoints
Limits
For deterministic pipelines, bulk data jobs and integrations that must behave identically on every run, conventional automation platforms are the better tool. Agent judgement is a feature where variation is acceptable and a liability where it is not.
Give new agents a probation period. They act on live email and customer records, so start with narrow permissions and review their output before letting them run unattended. Heavy, always-on automation can also draw down plan allowances quickly, which is worth checking before you scale.
Compares
| vs | Pick Lindy when | Pick the other when |
|---|---|---|
| ZapierFull comparison → | Lindy delegates outcomes rather than steps, handing a described job to an agent that triages the inbox, schedules meetings and keeps the CRM current with its own judgement inside your rules | the pipeline must behave identically on every run, no-code trigger-and-action execution across the thousands of apps only it connects |
| ManusFull comparison → | Lindy packages automation as employees rather than workflows, running on triggers across connected apps rather than inside a chat window, with templates putting a working agent minutes away | the job is one-off or irregular enough that configuring anything would cost more than the task, and a briefed agent should return the finished artefact |
| Relevance AIFull comparison → | Lindy is sized to one job rather than a function: describe it in plain language, connect the tools it needs, and a single agent works to its own judgement inside your rules | a whole business function needs several agents cooperating on research, outreach and operations rather than one taking a role |
| Claude CoworkFull comparison → | Lindy's agents act on live email and customer records, so they earn a probation period, narrow permissions first and output reviewed before anything runs unattended | the agent should be general and pointed at your own files, steered task by task rather than left holding a role |
| MakeFull comparison → | Lindy prepares the brief before a call and sends the follow-up afterwards, running lead sequences with human checkpoints inside them | what you want is the visual power tool of mainstream automation rather than a delegated job |
| n8nFull comparison → | Lindy keeps HubSpot or Salesforce updated from email and meeting activity, which is a job description rather than a pipeline | the team can run a server and its volume makes metered pricing hurt |
| CrewAIFull comparison → | Lindy is aimed at founders, sales teams and operators whose bottleneck is the administrative loop, rather than at engineers assembling a system | you are engineering a multi-agent system, not configuring an automation product |
| BardeenFull comparison → | Lindy's costs scale with how much its agents actually do, and heavy always-on automation draws down the plan allowance quickly enough to be worth checking before scaling | the repetitive work happens in browser tabs and copy-paste is the current tool |
| GumloopFull comparison → | Lindy's agents exercise judgement, which is a feature where variation is acceptable and a liability where it is not, so anything that must behave identically every run belongs elsewhere | the workflow's core steps are AI operations and you want to draw it, not code it |
| LangChain / LangGraphFull comparison → | Lindy is the answer when flowchart builders have defeated you and describing a job in sentences sounds better than wiring nodes together | you are coding agent systems and want maximum control with maximum ecosystem |
Where to start
Not sure what to adopt first?
Five quick questions about your job, task and constraints. We'll suggest your top three tools, plus the one to try first.
Common questions
Is Lindy free?
No: Lindy is a paid product, with plans for individuals and teams.
Where does Lindy fit best?
Lindy fits best in AI agents & automation and Productivity & personal assistant; see its practice notes for how.
Before sharing confidential or personal data, check this tool's data-governance and training policies. They differ between providers and can change.
Last checked: August 2026