The picks at a glance
editGPT
Best when the copy is drafted and needs tightening
A Word-first editor that shows every change an AI made and lets the writer accept or reverse each one, priced by the words put through it.
Mailscale
Best when the list and the sending need to arrive as one system
A cold-outreach platform with its own contact database and pre-warmed sending domains, billed by campaign volume rather than by headcount.
How we picked
A small B2B team buying AI help usually ends up paying for two different jobs: getting the writing right, and getting it in front of people. This guide covers one reviewed tool for each, and it keeps that split rather than implying a single product does both.
Both tools publish what their plans include, and those pages were read against the same three questions: what the entry plan actually allows, where the cost lands once the volume grows, and what the buyer keeps when the subscription stops. A tool that answers only the first is not much use to a team that expects to grow into it.
Everything below is read from the two companies’ own pricing, help and legal pages, and each source carries its check date in the list at the end. Neither tool was subscribed to for this page, so the figures describe the plans rather than how either performs, and each pick is argued out in full in its review.
The picks, in detail
editGPT
(Best when the copy is drafted and needs tightening)
editGPT is the pick when a draft exists and the job is to make it read better without losing control of it. Work goes in from a .docx and comes back out as a .docx, and every change the AI proposes sits in a suggestions panel the writer accepts or reverses one at a time. That last part is what separates it from asking a chatbot to rewrite a paragraph, where the original is gone the moment the answer arrives.
The allowance is where the plan ladder actually lives. It is counted in words rather than in seats, so adding a second writer does not add a second subscription, and the ceiling is what moves: 600 words in a single document on the free plan against 200,000 on the paid ones, with the monthly total rising from 20,000 to as much as unlimited. A team working in short documents and a team working in long ones will feel those two numbers very differently.
Skip it if the writing is not the bottleneck. This is an editor, not a place to plan a campaign, hold a contact list or send anything, and a team that needs those things is shopping for the pick below rather than for a better version of this one.
Read the review
Mailscale
(Best when the list and the sending need to arrive as one system)
Mailscale is the pick when the problem is not the wording but everything around it: where the addresses come from, whether the mail lands, and who answers when it does. The platform arrives with sending domains and inboxes already warmed, a contact database of its own, and reply handling that files answers into a shared inbox instead of into one person’s mailbox.
The price is the part to read twice, because it is set by volume rather than by headcount. The entry plan starts at $500 a month for 12,500 contacts and the largest runs to $4,000 for 150,000, which puts the annual commitment at the size of a hire. A new account opens with 2,000 credits, and those do not renew, so the opening allowance is a sample of the tool rather than a tier to run on.
Skip it if the outreach is occasional. Below a few thousand contacts a month the platform is priced for a volume that is not there yet, and a team sending a hundred messages a week is paying for sending infrastructure it will not use.
Read the review
How they compare
Key differences between the two AI marketing tools reviewed for a small B2B team
| Tool |
Best for |
Starting price |
Free tier |
| editGPT |
Drafted copy that needs tightening |
From $10 a month, or $60 a year on Pro |
Yes · 20,000 words a month, 600 a document |
| Mailscale |
Running the list and the sending together |
From $500 a month for 12,500 contacts |
No · 2,000 credits on a new account, not renewed |
Swipe the table sideways to see every column.
Both sets of figures above come off the two companies’ own pricing pages, checked on 16 September 2026. The two entry figures are not the same unit, since one is priced in words a month and the other in contacts, so these columns say more about the shape of each bill than about which one is better value.
Buying AI help for a team of five or fewer
Two questions decide this before any feature list does.
Is the work upstream or downstream of the list?
Writing help and outreach infrastructure fail in different places and are usually bought by different people. The first is judged by whether the document that leaves the tool is better than the one that went in, and it fails when the writer stops trusting the proposed changes and edits them all back. The second is judged by whether the mail arrives, and it fails quietly, in a spam folder, long after the invoice has been paid. A team with a writing problem and a deliverability problem has two purchases ahead of it, not one, and buying the second while the first is unsolved only adds a bill.
Which number grows when the team does?
The two bills scale on different axes, and the one that matches your growth is the cheaper one. A word allowance grows with output, so a productive month costs more than a quiet one and a new writer costs nothing at all. A contact-tier price grows with the size of the audience, and it steps rather than slides, so the month a list crosses 12,500 contacts the bill changes by a multiple instead of by a little. Choose the tool whose axis matches the thing you expect to grow.
Neither tool replaces the person who decides what to say. One tightens a draft a human wrote and the other delivers a message a human approved, and both are priced as though that were true. A team without someone doing that part will watch the bill scale faster than the output does.
Frequently asked questions
Can one tool cover both jobs?+
No, and the split is not a packaging choice. Editing a document and running an outbound list ask for different things: one reads what a person already wrote, the other decides who receives it and whether it arrives. Neither of the two reviewed here attempts the other half.
Is the free tier on either enough for a small team to judge it?+
Partly, on editGPT: 20,000 words a month is a working allowance, but the ceiling is 600 words in a single document on the free plan, which rules out long-form work. The suggestions panel, custom prompts and Word import sit on the paid plans. On Mailscale the opening 2,000 credits are a one-off on a new account and do not renew, so they show how the platform reads a list rather than fund a campaign.
Which of the two scales with the size of the team?+
Neither charges per seat, and that is the useful part for a small team. editGPT counts words a month and Mailscale counts contacts on a plan, so a fifth colleague costs nothing extra on either of them. What grows the bill is output in the first case and audience in the second.
Which half to buy first
Buy the editing tool first if a draft is what is missing. editGPT costs a fraction of the other pick, it works on documents the team already produces, and the free allowance is enough to find out whether the changes it proposes are ones a writer will keep.
Mailscale is a larger decision of a different kind, since it is infrastructure for reaching people, priced at the level of a monthly hire, and it only pays for itself once there is a list worth sending to. A team that has not built that list yet has nothing for it to work on.
Sources
editGPT (editgpt.app), checked 16 September 2026: the plan table for the monthly word allowances, the per-document ceilings and the yearly rate, the help pages for the browsers the extension runs in, and the FAQ on using the editor without a ChatGPT account.
Mailscale (mailscale.ai), checked 16 September 2026: the plan table for the monthly contact tiers and the credits a new account opens with, the feature list for what each plan carries, and the anti-spam page for the compliance position the company states.
Also on ElevenReview
Reviews and comparisons
Last updated Sep 16, 2026 · Some links on this page may be affiliate links; see our Affiliate Disclosure.
