Tools I Actually Use

The AI and productivity tools that are actually worth my time—and why most of the hype is noise.

---

I’ve tried dozens of AI tools. Most of them are forgettable.

Not because they’re bad, but because they don’t stick. They solve a problem I don’t have, or they create more friction than they remove.

Here’s what’s actually in my daily rotation—and what I’ve learned about separating signal from noise.

What’s Actually in My Stack

Claude is my primary workhorse. I use it for writing, coding, research, and thinking through problems. It’s not perfect, but it’s consistent in ways other tools aren’t. The context window matters more than I expected.

Cursor has replaced VS Code for most of my development work. AI-assisted coding isn’t about replacing thinking—it’s about removing the mechanical friction that slows down experimentation. I still write plenty of code manually. Cursor just handles the boring parts faster.

Notion remains my system of record. I’ve tried Obsidian, Roam, and a dozen alternatives. Notion wins because it’s good enough at everything and excellent at nothing. That sounds like criticism, but it’s actually the point. I don’t want to optimize my note-taking system. I want to take notes.

Process Street (full disclosure: I work here) handles my recurring workflows and SOPs. The value isn’t the software itself—it’s the discipline of documenting processes that would otherwise live in my head. Most people skip this step. That’s a mistake.

Zapier connects everything else. I have maybe 15 active Zaps. Most are simple: new form submission → Slack notification, new blog post → social share, etc. The magic isn’t in complexity. It’s in not having to remember to do repetitive tasks.

What I’ve Stopped Using

ChatGPT Plus—I let my subscription lapse. It’s not worse than Claude, but I don’t need two general-purpose AI assistants. Pick one. Use it well.

Most “AI writing” tools—If a tool promises to “write blog posts for you,” it’s probably producing generic content that sounds like everyone else. I use AI to think and draft, not to replace my voice.

Complex automation setups—I used to build elaborate multi-step workflows. Now I default to simple. If a Zap has more than 3 steps, I question whether I’m solving the right problem.

The Pattern

The tools that stick share a few traits:

• They remove friction, not add it. If I have to think about using the tool, I won’t.
• They integrate with my existing workflow. I don’t want to rebuild my life around software.
• They have clear failure modes. When they break, I know immediately and can fix them.

What I’m Testing Now

I’m experimenting with a few tools that might earn a permanent spot:

• Perplexity for research—still deciding if it’s better than Claude for this use case
• Replit for quick prototyping—interesting, but not sure it beats local development yet
• Various image generation tools—mostly for blog headers and social content

The bar for adding a new tool is high. It needs to solve a real problem I have today, not a hypothetical problem I might have someday.

The Real Lesson

The best tool is the one you’ll actually use. Not the one with the most features. Not the one that gets the most hype on Twitter.

I’ve seen people spend more time optimizing their productivity stack than doing actual work. Don’t be that person.

Pick simple tools. Use them consistently. Move on.

---

What’s in your actual daily stack? Not what you think you should use—what you actually open every day. I’d genuinely love to know.