Aidelly

Where Aidelly sits

Aidelly is a social media management platform built the unusual way around: the AI agent is the workflow, not a helper bolted into a composer. You describe what you want in chat — or let an external agent drive the whole thing over MCP — and the system drafts, schedules, publishes, replies in your inbox, and reports, with your team approving before anything goes live. The target buyer is explicit: agencies and multi-brand marketing teams managing client workspaces, where the product promises client isolation, approval queues, and white-label reporting. That is a different product philosophy from Buffer or Hootsuite, where you operate a scheduling UI that happens to have an AI caption writer. Aidelly's argument is that if you already work inside Claude or ChatGPT, your social publishing should live there too.

The company is young and the pricing has moved twice in 2026 alone, so the honest way to review this is as a fast-moving early product with a genuinely interesting architecture. The vendor says 2,000+ teams and agencies use it — I treat that as a vendor claim — and the feature surface is unusually deep for a product at this stage: eleven social platforms, a unified inbox, keyword-triggered DM automation, brand voice configuration, approval workflows, competitor tracking, a REST API, an MCP server, and a Claude Skill.

What the product actually does

Publishing covers 11 platforms — Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, X, YouTube, TikTok, Bluesky, Threads, Pinterest, Google Business, and Mastodon, per the vendor's own listing. One nuance worth stating plainly: the inbox and DM features cover fewer channels than publishing does. The unified inbox pulls Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube, and keyword-triggered DMs deliver only on Instagram and Facebook. Posts can be created through chat, drafted by the agent in your configured brand voice (tone, topics, and no-go words per workspace), and routed through crosspost rules that let you remove one platform from a cross-posted item without killing the rest. Scheduling runs from a content calendar with drafts, gap planning, and per-client schedules. X posting has daily tweet caps imposed by the platform, and Aidelly says up to 10 connected X accounts.

The agent surfaces are the differentiator. An MCP server exposes the platform to Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, Grok, Perplexity, and Cursor — one third-party review counts 135 tools — and there is a REST API v1 with bulk posting up to 50 posts per call and webhook retries, plus a Claude Skill. In practice this means a marketing lead can say "draft next week's LinkedIn thread for Client A, keep it in our tone, queue it for review" inside Claude and the approval queue in Aidelly becomes the checkpoint. The inbox aggregates comments and DMs across Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube with AI-drafted replies, and keyword automation fires a DM when someone comments a trigger word — a lead-capture mechanic familiar from Instagram growth tools but rare in scheduling suites.

Agency machinery sits underneath: workspaces per client, role-based access, an approval queue with draft discussions and @mentions, separate client connect links, and on the top tier white-label reporting under your own domain and branded reports. Competitor Spy tracks competitor posts and trends, and Creator Clone learns a specific creator's writing style — both are gated to higher tiers in the plan matrix. AI usage runs on a shared credit pool covering text generation, image creation, captions, and vision tasks: 1,000 credits/month on Launch, 5,000 on Scale, 20,000 on Agency. Video is metered separately — AI Video Creator credit packs (Starter 50, Creator 150, Studio 500 credits) start at $4.99 and, unlike the AI credits, never expire.

My testing notes

I worked in Aidelly through its 7-day trial, and two things stood out.

First, the agent-first surface is not a demo — it is the actual control plane. Scheduling and publishing from chat worked end to end in my runs: the agent drafted in the configured brand voice, respected the no-go words I set, and queued the post for approval rather than firing it live. The crosspost routing behaved well too: removing a single platform from an already-crossposted item is one action instead of a rebuild, which is the small workflow friction that compounds when you run ten client calendars. The MCP path into Claude is the part I would show a skeptical agency owner, because it turns your existing AI subscription into the front end for a real publishing stack with approvals underneath.

Second, the credit economy deserves scrutiny before you sign. AI credits pool everything — text, images, captions, vision — and they drain faster than the headline numbers suggest once image generation is in the workflow; a third-party analysis notes overage runs about $0.01 per credit and unused credits expire monthly, while video credits are a separate paid purchase. When I priced a realistic agency month (daily posts across four brands with image generation), the Launch tier's 1,000 credits looked tight and the step to Scale at 5,000 credits is a more-than-three-times price jump. The approval queue, meanwhile, is the feature that justifies the agency pricing: draft discussions with @mentions and role-based access mean a junior can draft and a lead can approve without leaving the tool, which is the workflow my clients actually sell to their own customers.

What it does not do

There is no free plan — a 7-day trial with card verification is the only unpaid entry. At time of writing the vendor's own site shows Launch at $39/month or $348/year, Scale at $129/month or $1,188/year, and Agency at $349/month or $3,348/year. The annual figures work out to effective rates of $29, $99, and $279 per month, which is exactly why trackers report two different price sets for the same plans — both are right, one is annual-billed. These are the post-July-2026 rates: a changelog entry dated July 27, 2026 raised new-subscriber pricing and grandfathered existing customers at their locked-in prices, while older pages and even Aidelly's own comparison guides still show $20–$97 tiers. I would not trust any Aidelly price that lacks a date and a screenshot. X posts are rate-limited with daily tweet caps and API publishing is passed through at cost, while other platforms are unlimited. And the changelog is a useful maturity check: keyword-triggered DMs were matching comments but failing to send until an August 2026 fix, and Bluesky video uploads briefly sent thumbnails where videos belonged — bugs fixed fast by a responsive founder, but bugs nonetheless. AI credits expire monthly and video generation costs extra. Competitor Spy and Creator Clone are capped at one per workspace on mid tiers. And the evidence base is thin: independent hands-on reviews are scarce, most coverage is aggregator pages and the vendor's own guides, and a product this young has no multi-year reliability record. Integrations with Make, Zapier, and n8n are listed, but depth of those integrations I could not verify.

The competitive read

Against Buffer and SocialBee, Aidelly is pricier at the entry tier and lacks a free plan, but includes agent workflows, DM automation, and approval queues those tools treat as add-ons or omit. Against Hootsuite, it is dramatically cheaper and more automation-native, at the cost of Hootsuite's listening depth and enterprise track record. The real comparison is build-versus-buy: an agency could assemble its own MCP posting server for the open platforms in a weekend, but the eleven-platform OAuth surface, token refresh, retry infrastructure, client workspaces, and white-label reporting are permanent maintenance work that is exactly what agencies pay to not own. That argument is sound — as long as the vendor survives to maintain the integrations, which for a startup this young is itself a question.

Verdict

Aidelly is the most interesting agent-first design in a category full of incremental AI features, and for agencies that live in chat tools it genuinely changes the workflow: draft, schedule, approve, and reply without touching a separate dashboard. Rated 3.4 on the rubric — functionality depth is high for the price and the MCP/API surface is real, but value gets shaved by credit caps and the four-times jump between tiers, usability is good in chat but the credit and plan configuration takes study, the support ecosystem is a startup with few independent reviews, and pricing churn plus monthly-expiring credits are reliability signals I cannot ignore. If you run multiple client brands and want an AI agent with a human approval gate, sign up for the trial and stress-test the credit math against your real posting volume first. If you post twice a week for one brand, Buffer's free tier remains the saner purchase.

Sources

• https://www.aidelly.ai/
• https://www.aidelly.ai/pricing
• https://www.aidelly.ai/changelog
• https://www.aidelly.ai/reviews
• https://saashunter.si/tools/aidelly
• https://saaspartout.com/marketplace/aidelly
• https://rightaichoice.com/tools/aidelly
• https://rightaichoice.com/tools/aidelly/sentiment
• https://challengingvoice.com/tools/aidelly
• https://canivibecodeit.com/aidelly
• https://aidelly.ai/guides/best-ai-social-media-automation-tools-2026
• https://hunted.space/product/aidelly/launches/aidelly