The datasheet for every AI agent

AI Agent Tools With Usage-Based Pricing

22 of the 94 tools in our index bill by usage rather than a flat seat or subscription fee — per minute, per resolution, per token, or per dollar of compute. For 5 of them, the rate you would actually pay per unit is never published: it is set in a sales call.

"Usage-based" sounds like the transparent option — pay only for what you use, and calculate your own cost before you sign up. That holds for all but five of these 22 tools, which publish an actual number you can price your own usage against: [Vapi](/vapi) at $0.05/minute, [Bland AI](/bland-ai) at $0.14/minute, [Intercom Fin](/intercom-fin) at $0.99/resolution, [OpenAI Realtime API](/openai-realtime-api) at $32/$64 per million audio tokens, [Webhound](/webhound) from $1 for a narrow research check — a real rate card in every case, whatever the unit. [Devin](/devin) sells the meter as an allowance rather than a rate, $500/month for 250 Agent Compute Units on its Team plan or from $20/month pay-as-you-go, which is still a number you can budget against.

It breaks for the other five. [Sierra](/sierra), [Decagon](/decagon), [Ada](/ada) and [PolyAI](/polyai) each state their pricing model in the abstract — "outcome-based," "per minute," "per conversation" — then list "Custom" where the actual number should be; none publishes a rate card or offers self-serve signup, and independent purchase-data estimates (not vendor figures) are the only cost signal available for three of the four. [Zendesk AI Agents](/zendesk-ai-agents) is the more interesting case: it publishes real seat pricing ($55-$115/agent/month) and bills genuine usage on top through Verified Resolutions, but the overage rate itself — what a resolution above your plan allowance actually costs — is not stated on Zendesk's own pricing page; the ~$1.20-$1.50 figure on that listing is a third-party estimate, not a published one.

The free-tier split tracks this same divide closely: [Clay](/clay), [Manus](/manus), [ElevenLabs Conversational AI](/elevenlabs-conversational-ai) and [Genspark](/genspark) — 4 of these 22 — let you run real usage at $0 before paying anything, and all four sit in the public-rate group. None of the sales-led, custom-quoted tools offers any free tier or self-serve path at all.

By category, the filter bites hardest in [support agents](/category/support-agents): 8 of 9 bill by usage, the highest share of any category here, and support is where the outcome-based, sales-quoted pattern concentrates. [Voice agents](/category/voice-agents) contribute the same number of entries from a larger pool, 8 of 12 — per-minute billing is close to the category default there. [Research & data agents](/category/research-agents) add 4 of 11, and [coding agents](/category/coding-agents) 2 of 25.

Why this collection

A tool earns a place here if its own Published, sourced listing records `attributes.pricingModel` as `usage-based` — billed by a metered unit (minutes, resolutions, tokens, dollars of compute) rather than a flat per-seat subscription or one-time fee. Within that set, each entry's own `pricingTiers` data was read directly for whether the vendor publishes an actual per-unit number a buyer could use to estimate cost before signing up, or states the pricing model without the rate (`priceDisplay: 'Custom'`, sales-led only, no self-serve signup) — and, separately, whether an ongoing $0 tier exists (a limited free trial or one-time signup credit does not count as a free tier). Every number cited is the listing's own already-researched, sourced figure; where a figure is a third-party estimate rather than the vendor's own published number, the entry says so explicitly, exactly as the source listing does.

The full ranking method →

22 agents in this collection