Verified AI Launch Intelligence
See what launched, what changed, and what it costs.
Track AI product launches, model updates, pricing changes and tested workflows. Each record separates official sources, company claims, Kingy testing and third-party evidence so you can see what is known and what remains unverified.
Editorial submissions and sponsor-fit reviews are separate. Payment does not influence Kingy scores, verdicts, rankings, evidence labels, or publication decisions.
Launch tracker
Browse the AI Launch Tracker
Search source-backed launch records, then use common filters first and advanced filters only when you need a narrower view.
Model Context Protocol 2026-07-28 specification goes final
The final Model Context Protocol 2026-07-28 specification became the current authoritative protocol version. It replaces connection-level state with self-contained requests, moves capability negotiation to each request and formalizes…
The 2026-07-28 MCP specification makes a consequential architectural trade: stateless, self-contained requests can simplify scaling and recovery, but implementations must now negotiate and validate…
GitHub Copilot Cost Centers AI Credit Pools
GitHub added AI credit pools to cost centers on July 2, 2026 so eligible enterprises can cap how much included Copilot AI credit usage a group draws from…
- Launch readiness
- 6.8 / 10
- Demo evidence
- Not scored yet
- Creator-story fit
- Not scored yet
Score definitions and rubric
These are launch-record readiness heuristics, not product ratings.
Launch readiness
How complete and reviewable the launch record is, not the quality of the product.
Inputs and weights: Launch date 15%; qualifying source 10%; what launched 10%; demo 15%; category 10%; audience 10%; editorial assessment 10%; traction evidence 10%; creator or audience fit 10%.
Evidence inputs: Reviewed launch metadata, public source links, demo links, taxonomy, audience, editorial notes, and recorded traction signals.
Demo evidence
Whether the record contains useful, reviewable demonstration evidence; it is not a rating of product output quality.
Inputs and weights: Working demo URL 45%; video walkthrough 25%; clear description of what launched 10%; audience 10%; editorial assessment 10%.
Evidence inputs: Demo and video URLs plus the reviewed launch description, audience, and editorial notes.
Creator-story fit
Whether a launch has enough demonstrable evidence and audience relevance for a useful creator story; it does not predict views or guarantee coverage.
Inputs and weights: Demo evidence 25%; visual creator category 15%; audience 15%; editorial assessment 15%; traction evidence 10%; pricing clarity 10%; API or open-weight evidence 10%.
Evidence inputs: Reviewed demo, category, audience, editorial, traction, pricing, API, and open-weight fields.
- Scale
- 0.0–10.0. A present qualifying input receives its published weight; a missing input receives zero. Scores are rounded to one decimal.
- Assigned by
- Suggested by the deterministic field-completeness helper and assigned or approved by a Kingy editorial reviewer.
- Rubric and check date
- Rubric version P0-2026-08-10. The record’s “Last verified” date is the score check date. Checked: 2026-07-09.
- Confidence and missing data
- Confidence depends on source completeness. “Not scored yet” means no reviewed value; “Needs review” means the value or score set failed validation.
- Freshness
- Recalculate after a material launch, source, demo, pricing, audience, or traction change and during the record freshness review.
- Disputes
- Use “Suggest a correction” on the record and cite the relevant evidence. Commercial relationships cannot buy or alter a score.
GitHub added AI credit pools to cost centers, letting eligible enterprises cap how much included Copilot usage a group draws from the shared pool…
GitHub Copilot AI Agent Session Limits
GitHub added public-preview AI credit session limits to Copilot CLI and the GitHub Copilot SDK on July 1, 2026.
- Launch readiness
- 7.0 / 10
- Demo evidence
- Not scored yet
- Creator-story fit
- Not scored yet
Score definitions and rubric
These are launch-record readiness heuristics, not product ratings.
Launch readiness
How complete and reviewable the launch record is, not the quality of the product.
Inputs and weights: Launch date 15%; qualifying source 10%; what launched 10%; demo 15%; category 10%; audience 10%; editorial assessment 10%; traction evidence 10%; creator or audience fit 10%.
Evidence inputs: Reviewed launch metadata, public source links, demo links, taxonomy, audience, editorial notes, and recorded traction signals.
Demo evidence
Whether the record contains useful, reviewable demonstration evidence; it is not a rating of product output quality.
Inputs and weights: Working demo URL 45%; video walkthrough 25%; clear description of what launched 10%; audience 10%; editorial assessment 10%.
Evidence inputs: Demo and video URLs plus the reviewed launch description, audience, and editorial notes.
Creator-story fit
Whether a launch has enough demonstrable evidence and audience relevance for a useful creator story; it does not predict views or guarantee coverage.
Inputs and weights: Demo evidence 25%; visual creator category 15%; audience 15%; editorial assessment 15%; traction evidence 10%; pricing clarity 10%; API or open-weight evidence 10%.
Evidence inputs: Reviewed demo, category, audience, editorial, traction, pricing, API, and open-weight fields.
- Scale
- 0.0–10.0. A present qualifying input receives its published weight; a missing input receives zero. Scores are rounded to one decimal.
- Assigned by
- Suggested by the deterministic field-completeness helper and assigned or approved by a Kingy editorial reviewer.
- Rubric and check date
- Rubric version P0-2026-08-10. The record’s “Last verified” date is the score check date. Checked: 2026-07-09.
- Confidence and missing data
- Confidence depends on source completeness. “Not scored yet” means no reviewed value; “Needs review” means the value or score set failed validation.
- Freshness
- Recalculate after a material launch, source, demo, pricing, audience, or traction change and during the record freshness review.
- Disputes
- Use “Suggest a correction” on the record and cite the relevant evidence. Commercial relationships cannot buy or alter a score.
GitHub added public-preview AI credit session limits to Copilot CLI and the SDK, putting a task-level boundary around model, subagent, and background usage in…
Copilot Code Review Analysis Depth
GitHub updated Copilot code review on June 25, 2026 with organization defaults and visible attribution for the Medium review-effort preview, plus a new file-exploration path built on Copilot…
- Launch readiness
- 6.8 / 10
- Demo evidence
- Not scored yet
- Creator-story fit
- Not scored yet
Score definitions and rubric
These are launch-record readiness heuristics, not product ratings.
Launch readiness
How complete and reviewable the launch record is, not the quality of the product.
Inputs and weights: Launch date 15%; qualifying source 10%; what launched 10%; demo 15%; category 10%; audience 10%; editorial assessment 10%; traction evidence 10%; creator or audience fit 10%.
Evidence inputs: Reviewed launch metadata, public source links, demo links, taxonomy, audience, editorial notes, and recorded traction signals.
Demo evidence
Whether the record contains useful, reviewable demonstration evidence; it is not a rating of product output quality.
Inputs and weights: Working demo URL 45%; video walkthrough 25%; clear description of what launched 10%; audience 10%; editorial assessment 10%.
Evidence inputs: Demo and video URLs plus the reviewed launch description, audience, and editorial notes.
Creator-story fit
Whether a launch has enough demonstrable evidence and audience relevance for a useful creator story; it does not predict views or guarantee coverage.
Inputs and weights: Demo evidence 25%; visual creator category 15%; audience 15%; editorial assessment 15%; traction evidence 10%; pricing clarity 10%; API or open-weight evidence 10%.
Evidence inputs: Reviewed demo, category, audience, editorial, traction, pricing, API, and open-weight fields.
- Scale
- 0.0–10.0. A present qualifying input receives its published weight; a missing input receives zero. Scores are rounded to one decimal.
- Assigned by
- Suggested by the deterministic field-completeness helper and assigned or approved by a Kingy editorial reviewer.
- Rubric and check date
- Rubric version P0-2026-08-10. The record’s “Last verified” date is the score check date. Checked: 2026-07-09.
- Confidence and missing data
- Confidence depends on source completeness. “Not scored yet” means no reviewed value; “Needs review” means the value or score set failed validation.
- Freshness
- Recalculate after a material launch, source, demo, pricing, audience, or traction change and during the record freshness review.
- Disputes
- Use “Suggest a correction” on the record and cite the relevant evidence. Commercial relationships cannot buy or alter a score.
GitHub updated Copilot code review with organization defaults, visible attribution for the Medium review-effort preview, and a new file-exploration path built on Copilot CLI…
OpenAI frontier models and Codex become available on AWS
OpenAI announced that frontier models and Codex are available on AWS, expanding enterprise deployment options for OpenAI-powered agentic workflows.
- Launch readiness
- 6.2 / 10
- Demo evidence
- Not scored yet
- Creator-story fit
- Not scored yet
Score definitions and rubric
These are launch-record readiness heuristics, not product ratings.
Launch readiness
How complete and reviewable the launch record is, not the quality of the product.
Inputs and weights: Launch date 15%; qualifying source 10%; what launched 10%; demo 15%; category 10%; audience 10%; editorial assessment 10%; traction evidence 10%; creator or audience fit 10%.
Evidence inputs: Reviewed launch metadata, public source links, demo links, taxonomy, audience, editorial notes, and recorded traction signals.
Demo evidence
Whether the record contains useful, reviewable demonstration evidence; it is not a rating of product output quality.
Inputs and weights: Working demo URL 45%; video walkthrough 25%; clear description of what launched 10%; audience 10%; editorial assessment 10%.
Evidence inputs: Demo and video URLs plus the reviewed launch description, audience, and editorial notes.
Creator-story fit
Whether a launch has enough demonstrable evidence and audience relevance for a useful creator story; it does not predict views or guarantee coverage.
Inputs and weights: Demo evidence 25%; visual creator category 15%; audience 15%; editorial assessment 15%; traction evidence 10%; pricing clarity 10%; API or open-weight evidence 10%.
Evidence inputs: Reviewed demo, category, audience, editorial, traction, pricing, API, and open-weight fields.
- Scale
- 0.0–10.0. A present qualifying input receives its published weight; a missing input receives zero. Scores are rounded to one decimal.
- Assigned by
- Suggested by the deterministic field-completeness helper and assigned or approved by a Kingy editorial reviewer.
- Rubric and check date
- Rubric version P0-2026-08-10. The record’s “Last verified” date is the score check date. Checked: 2026-06-08.
- Confidence and missing data
- Confidence depends on source completeness. “Not scored yet” means no reviewed value; “Needs review” means the value or score set failed validation.
- Freshness
- Recalculate after a material launch, source, demo, pricing, audience, or traction change and during the record freshness review.
- Disputes
- Use “Suggest a correction” on the record and cite the relevant evidence. Commercial relationships cannot buy or alter a score.
OpenAI announced that its frontier models and Codex are available on AWS, confirmed by both companies' posts (openai.com). Enterprise Platform Teams standardized on AWS…
Daily radar
Latest verified AI launches
A Radar edition publishes only when the day has enough source-ready signal; the tracker continues to show the newest verified records.
No source-ready records are tagged for today yet, so this section is showing the latest public launch records available in the tracker.
RayNeo iO
Summary: RayNeo announced the iO smart glasses on August 21, 2026. The official product page labels the device as coming September 4; it is an announced product,…
Why it matters: RayNeo iO is a legitimate product announcement with a dated commercial-launch target, but it is not yet a shipping product. Treat hardware, AI-assistant, battery,…
- Pricing
- The official product page advertises an early-bird offer and an extra discount but does not expose a reliable final product price in the reviewed page text. RayNeo states a September 4 launch; verify regional pricing and shipping status at release.
- Verification
- Source-verified; 3 sources
Attentive AI Grow
Summary: Attentive announced the general availability of AI Grow on August 19, 2026. The product analyzes browsing and shopping behavior among identified and logged-out visitors to decide…
Why it matters: AI Grow is a commercially relevant launch because it applies AI to an established subscriber-acquisition workflow, is generally available, and is measured with cohort-level…
- Pricing
- Attentive does not publish AI Grow list pricing in the reviewed launch materials. The product is available to Attentive customers through a sales or demo path.
- Verification
- Source-verified; 2 sources
WethosAI Twins
Summary: WethosAI launched Twins on August 18, 2026 as part of its Human Context Platform. The company says organizations can use the capability through its SaaS product,…
Why it matters: Twins is an intriguing enterprise decision-rehearsal launch because WethosAI states explicit permission, access-control, and non-impersonation boundaries. The vendor has not published independent predictive-validity evidence…
- Pricing
- Public list pricing was not disclosed in the reviewed launch materials. WethosAI offers a request-a-briefing or demo path for the SaaS platform and enterprise/API use.
- Verification
- Source-verified; 3 sources
Cerebras CS-4
Summary: Cerebras introduced CS-4 on August 18, 2026. The company describes a redesigned rack-scale system using three WSE-3 Turbo processors, a modular Nexus platform, native disaggregated-inference support,…
Why it matters: Cerebras CS-4 is a consequential AI-infrastructure launch with a concrete shipment window and architectural changes beyond a processor refresh. Its headline speed, throughput, and…
- Pricing
- Public list pricing was not disclosed in the reviewed launch sources. Cerebras directs buyers to contact sales, and the company says first shipments begin this quarter.
- Verification
- Source-verified; 3 sources
ChatGPT for Teens
Summary: OpenAI announced ChatGPT for Teens on August 18, 2026. Eligible users aged 13 to 17, including accounts the system estimates are under 18, are placed into…
Why it matters: A material ChatGPT update for teens and families because it attaches defined learning features and default protections to a distinct under-18 experience. Kingy has…
- Pricing
- OpenAI does not list a separate ChatGPT for Teens price. The help documentation says eligible accounts remain active when the teen experience is enabled; plan eligibility, feature limits, and regional rollout can vary and should be checked before relying on access.
- Verification
- Source-verified; 2 sources
DeepSeek Harness developer preview
Summary: DeepSeek opened the DeepSeek Harness developer preview and published its source code on August 13, 2026. The official landing page and repository describe an agent harness…
Why it matters: This is a substantive launch for developers because DeepSeek published both a runnable package and the source behind a composable agent runtime. Treat it…
- Pricing
- The source code is published under the MIT License and the documented local start path does not list a purchase price. The reviewed official sources do not advertise a paid hosted tier. Local use requires a compatible Node.js runtime and the user's own model or service costs may still apply.
- Verification
- Source-verified; 6 sources
Plan ahead
Upcoming Deadlines
Future-dated migration, shutdown, and retirement records are separated from today's launches and latest-record lists. These dates are upcoming operational events, not launches that have already happened.
Google retires Gemini Robotics ER 1.6 Preview on August 31
Summary: Google announced that gemini-robotics-er-1.6-preview will shut down on August 31, 2026, and its deprecation table names gemini-robotics-er-2-preview as the replacement.
Why it matters: Google announced that gemini-robotics-er-1.6-preview will shut down on August 31, 2026, and its deprecation table names gemini-robotics-er-2-preview as the replacement. Kingy’s action: Replace the…
- Pricing
- No pricing change announced
- Verification
- Source-verified; 2 sources
Google currently lists no Gemini 2.5 Pro shutdown date
Summary: Google lists October 16, 2026 as the earliest possible shutdown date for Gemini 2.5 Pro and names gemini-3.1-pro-preview as the recommended replacement. Google says users will…
Why it matters: Treat October 16 as a migration deadline to plan around, not a guaranteed retirement day. Google labels it the earliest possible shutdown date for…
- Pricing
- The deprecation notice has no separate charge. Gemini 2.5 Pro offers free-tier input and output tokens. Paid standard rates are $1.25 per million input tokens and $10 per million output tokens for prompts up to 200,000 tokens, rising to $2.50 and $15 above that threshold.
- Verification
- Source-verified; 2 sources
OpenAI Agent Builder shutdown deadline: November 30, 2026
Summary: OpenAI announced the Agent Builder lifecycle deadline: the visual workflow builder is deprecated and scheduled to shut down on November 30, 2026. OpenAI documents two migration…
Why it matters: Treat November 30 as a workflow migration deadline, not a new product launch and not a one-line model swap. Export each workflow, inventory nodes,…
- Pricing
- There is no separate shutdown or migration fee. Replacement API usage and ChatGPT workspace access follow current OpenAI pricing; engineering, evaluation, observability and rollback work remain implementation costs.
- Verification
- Source-verified; 5 sources
The Kingy Brief
Follow The Kingy Brief.
One consequential launch, one pricing, limit, or shutdown change, one hands-on test, one exact prompt or Test Pack, and one try / watch / skip verdict.
Free · Choose your subjects · Double opt-in · Unsubscribe anytime
Explore launch categories, methodology and participation Awards archive, category paths, methodology, submissions, sponsorship and newsletter
Awards archive
Launches of the Week is paused
Prior editions remain available as an archive. Kingy is not currently promising a new weekly awards edition.
Category navigation
Find AI launches by market, workflow, and source signal
The Kingy AI Referral Index
AI assistants sent 1.3279% of kingy.ai's own traffic. Published studies put the web-wide figure anywhere from under 1% to 25%. The index reconciles them, catalogued by method.
Methodology
How Kingy AI Scores Launches
Kingy AI scoring is designed for launch discovery, editorial review, creator planning, and buyer trust checks.
Kingy score
A directional editorial score for launch clarity, source quality, audience fit, pricing visibility, demo usefulness, and practical buyer or creator value.
Demo score
A signal for whether the product can be shown, tested, explained, or compared without relying on vague announcement copy.
YouTube potential
A creator-fit signal for demos, tutorials, before-and-after workflows, explainers, reviews, and audience-specific product education.
Source verification
Records distinguish verified, needs verification, and founder submitted status using official URLs, source links, last-verified dates, and correction paths.
Pricing clarity
Pricing signals favor launches with visible pricing, free-plan status, pricing pages, API access notes, or clear uncertainty when pricing is not public.
Use-case clarity
Launches are easier to evaluate when the audience, workflow, category, demo, and alternative comparison are obvious from public sources.
Founder and sponsor fit
Founder submissions and sponsor interest are routing signals only; editorial review still checks source quality, public claims, demo clarity, and usefulness.
Verification labels
Verified means enough public source evidence is present, needs verification means the record needs more checking, and founder submitted means the entry came through the submission path.
Scores are editorial signals, not scientific benchmarks, paid placements, or guarantees.
Founder submission
Submit Your AI Launch
Founders can send a launch for editorial review when the public source trail is ready to verify.
What to include
- Product name
- Website
- Launch date
- What launched
- Official source links
- Pricing page
- Demo/video
- Company info
- Category
- Public funding info
- Screenshots/media
Privacy note
Do not submit secrets, unreleased financials, private customer data, or regulated personal data.
Submit only public product, company, source, pricing, demo, and media details that Kingy AI can review without logging into private systems.
Sponsor path
Sponsor Kingy AI launch coverage
Launching an AI product that needs clear demos, creator education, and buyer trust? Sponsor a Kingy AI video or launch feature.