Compared with the alternatives
Each alternative is better at something. A free explorer is better for reading the Act end to end; a spreadsheet is better once you know your scope; a consultant is better for a legal opinion; a general-purpose AI is better for a first draft. This directory is better for one thing: an operational page per obligation, free. The kit is USD 499.
| Option | Better at | Weaker at | Cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| Free AI Act explorers (for example artificialintelligenceact.eu) | Reading the Act end to end, article by article, with the legislative history | Turning an article into a worklist with evidence and the controls you already run | Free |
| The IAPP and Big-4 client alerts | Explaining a theme, and the policy read on a change | One page per obligation that a team can work through and register | Membership or free |
| A spreadsheet you build yourself | Fitting your own scope and your own columns | Knowing what to put in it: the obligation, the party, the evidence, and the controls behind it | Your hours |
| An outside consultant | A legal opinion on your own facts, and defending it | Speed on the first pass, and cost | From several thousand dollars |
| A general-purpose AI assistant | A first draft, and answering a question in plain words | Being citable, versioned or checkable line by line against a held rule set | Subscription |
| AI Act Obligation Mapper | One page per obligation with the party, the evidence and the linked NIST AI RMF and ISO/IEC 42001 controls, free, plus a workbook and CSV for USD 499 | A legal opinion on your facts; a certification; the text of the regulation itself | Free; USD 499 for the kit |
Where a consultant is the right answer
If you need a legal opinion on whether the Act applies to a particular system, or you need to defend a position to a regulator, use your counsel. This tool names the question and gives you the source; it does not opine.
Where a spreadsheet is the right answer
If you already have your scope and your columns, a spreadsheet is fine. Start it from the kit CSV and it will already carry the obligation, the article, the role, the evidence and the controls.
Where a general-purpose AI is the right answer
For a first draft of a paragraph, yes. It is not citable and cannot be checked line by line against a held rule set, and it does not carry a dated source. Use it to draft, use this to check.