AI tools for kids: how to tell a real one from a repackaged chatbot

Why we're not giving you a ranked list

Ranked lists of AI tools for kids go stale within weeks — products change their age policies, add restricted modes, get acquired, or shut down. A list you can apply yourself keeps working. So this is a test rather than a table, and you can run it on any product, including the ones that launch after this was written.

It's also worth saying plainly: we build one of these tools. Treat everything below as a framework you can use against us as easily as against anyone else. If our answers to these questions were bad, you'd want to know.

The four-question test

• 1. Does it state a specific age range? — "For kids" is marketing. "For ages 8 to 12" is a design decision — it means someone chose a reading level, a topic space, and a supervision model. Vagueness here usually means an adult product with a kid-facing landing page.
• 2. Are topics restricted, or just filtered? — A filter blocks bad output after the model generates it. A restricted design limits what the system will engage with at all. The first fails occasionally by nature; the second fails much less often, and differently.
• 3. Can a parent see what happened? — Not a raw transcript dump — a summary you'd actually read. If there's no parent view at all, the product isn't expecting you in the loop, which tells you who it was designed for.
• 4. Does the child finish something? — Products that end in a made thing have a natural stopping point. Products that end when the child gets bored are optimising for time-on-app. This is the signal that predicts the most about a year of use.

The categories, and what each is good for

General-purpose assistants (ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini and similar) are the most capable and the least designed for children — most set a minimum age of 13 in their own terms. Useful with an adult for a specific task; a poor default for a nine-year-old alone.

Homework helpers and tutoring apps sit in the middle. The good ones refuse to hand over the answer and make the child work through it; the weak ones are answer machines with a study-themed skin. The four-question test sorts them quickly — especially question four.

Creation tools — image, music, story, and game builders — are where AI is most obviously worth a child's time, because the child has to decide what they want and judge what came back. Check where the output goes and whether anything is public by default.

Family AI helpers built for kids, the category Luchi is in, wrap creation in structure: a goal, an AI the child directs and checks rather than just chats with, and a parent view. The trade-off is honest — less open-ended freedom than a blank chat box, in exchange for a much better default for this age.

Before you let your child use anything new

1. 1. Read the age line in the terms, not the homepage The homepage says who they'd like to sell to; the terms say who they built for. When those disagree, believe the terms.
2. 2. Find out what happens to the data Is chat history stored? Can you delete it? Is it used for training? US services aimed at under-13s must obtain verifiable parental consent before collecting personal information — a signup flow that ignores this is telling you something.
3. 3. Try it yourself for ten minutes first Ask it something a curious child would ask, including something slightly cheeky. You'll learn more in ten minutes than from any review, including this one.
4. 4. Check for a stopping point Use it and see whether the product ever suggests you're finished. If it never does, you'll be the stopping point, every single time.
5. 5. Set the two rules before the first session No personal details, and show me what you made at the end. Agreed up front, they're a boundary; introduced later, they're a punishment.

Questions parents ask

What's the best AI tool for a 7-year-old?

One built specifically for that age, where the child makes something and you can see what happened. At seven, general-purpose assistants are the wrong shape regardless of brand — the issue isn't quality, it's that they were designed for adults.

Are free AI tools for kids safe?

Free isn't the risk factor; the business model is. Ask what the product is optimising for — a subscription tends to align with the child finishing and being happy, whereas engagement-funded products are rewarded for keeping them there.

How many AI tools should my child use?

One, used well, beats five sampled. The habits — direct it, check it, explain it — transfer across tools. Collecting apps doesn't build anything.

Should I trust the 'kids mode' on an adult AI app?

It's better than nothing and worth turning on. But it addresses content, which is the risk you were already going to manage, and not dependence or unverified answers, which are the ones that actually shape a child.

Red flags worth walking away from

• A companion framing — "Your child's new best friend" is a marketing promise about attachment, not learning. A tool that positions itself as a relationship is optimising for the thing you least want a nine-year-old forming with software.
• Streaks, daily rewards, and pressure to return — Borrowed from games and social apps, and they work — that's the problem. They're engineered to make stopping feel like a loss, which is a strange property for an educational product to want.
• No age gate and no consent flow — If a nine-year-old can sign up alone with an email address and nobody asks for a parent, the product has not thought about children as a regulated category — whatever the homepage says.
• Public sharing on by default — Children's creations posted to a feed, with usernames, visible to strangers. Sharing can be lovely; on by default, with no parent in the loop, is a different product than it appears.

One tool used well beats five sampled

Parents who take this seriously often end up with a folder of six AI apps their child has tried twice. It feels like diligence and it usually isn't — because the thing that matters transfers between tools, and collecting apps doesn't build it.

What transfers is the habit: decide what you want, say it precisely, check what came back, explain it to someone. A child who has practised that a hundred times in one product will apply it instantly to a product neither of you has seen. A child who has sampled six has practised nothing. So the useful question isn't which tool is best in the abstract — it's which one your child will actually keep using long enough for the habits to become theirs.

The COPPA test — the question the four-question test does not ask

The four questions above are about product design. This one is about US law, and it is the fastest way to separate a tool genuinely built for children from an adult chatbot with a cartoon on the login screen.

The Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act — 15 U.S.C. 6501–6505, implemented by the Federal Trade Commission at 16 CFR Part 312 — says that an online service directed to children under 13, or one that has actual knowledge it is collecting personal information from a child under 13, must give parents notice, obtain verifiable parental consent before collecting that information, let parents review and delete it, and let parents refuse further collection.

Read that list again as a product spec, because that is what it is. A tool that actually complies has four things you can see from the outside: an age gate that comes before data collection, a consent flow that involves a real adult, a way for you to see and export what has been collected, and a way for you to delete it and shut off collection. Those are not nice-to-haves that a thoughtful founder added. In the United States they are the law, and their absence is diagnostic.

This is also why so many general-purpose AI products simply say 13 and up in their terms. Building verifiable parental consent, parental access, deletion and revocation is real engineering work, and setting an age floor is cheaper. That is a legitimate business decision — but it means those products are not, and do not claim to be, built for your ten-year-old, and the "kids mode" bolted onto one of them is a content filter, not a consent system.

And the bar rose recently. The FTC published amendments to the COPPA Rule in the Federal Register on 22 April 2025, effective 23 June 2025, with full compliance required by 22 April 2026. Biometric identifiers now count as personal information. Disclosing a child’s personal information to a third party for anything not integral to the service now requires its own separate verifiable parental consent. And operators must maintain a written information-security program and a written data-retention policy — meaning "how long do you keep my child’s chats" now has to have a documented answer.

Run the COPPA check in ten minutes

1. 1. Search the privacy policy for "children" and "COPPA" Use your browser’s find function. A US operator that is genuinely subject to the Rule has a dedicated section, not a single sentence in a list. If the only hit is "our service is not directed to children under 13," you have your answer: this is an adult product, whatever the marketing says.
2. 2. Find the consent mechanism and see whether it is real The policy should describe how the operator obtains verifiable parental consent — a parent-created account with a verified email, a payment-card verification step, a signed form. Then go and start a sign-up as if you were the child. If you can reach a working account without an adult ever being involved, the described mechanism is not the mechanism.
3. 3. Locate the delete button before your child makes anything You have the right to have your child’s information deleted and to withdraw consent. Find where in the actual interface that happens — not in the policy, in the product. If the answer is "email support," it is technically compliant and practically a bad sign, because it means nobody built the path.
4. 4. Ask how long they keep it Under the amended Rule an operator must have a written data-retention policy, and it should say something specific — raw conversations for this many days, activity records for that many. "As long as necessary" is what a policy says when nobody has decided. This matters more than parents expect: an AI product is a running transcript of your child thinking out loud.
5. 5. Email them one question Send: "Does your service comply with COPPA for users under 13, how do you obtain verifiable parental consent, and what is your data-retention period for children’s conversations?" An operator that is subject to the Rule has these answers written down already. The speed and specificity of the reply tells you a great deal, and the absence of a reply tells you more.

What COPPA does not cover — and why compliance is not a recommendation

It would be dishonest to hand you this test without its limits, so here they are.

COPPA protects children under 13. The day your child turns 13 the federal protection described here stops applying to them, and the product’s obligations change even though your child did not. If you have a twelve-year-old, that is a date worth having in mind.

School use runs on different rails. When a district adopts a tool for classroom use, student-records privacy under FERPA and the district’s own contracts do much of the work, and a school can consent on parents’ behalf in defined circumstances. What the district approved for a school account does not tell you what is appropriate on your home iPad, and parents conflate these constantly.

And the biggest limit: COPPA is a privacy law, not a quality standard. It governs what happens to your child’s data. It says nothing about whether the AI gives good answers, whether the product is designed to keep your child engaged past the point of usefulness, whether it flatters them, or whether they learn anything. A fully compliant product can still be bad for your child. Run the four-question test and the COPPA test — they measure different things and you need both.

How Luchi answers its own tests

We wrote the tests above, so it would be poor form not to answer them. Everything in this table is implemented and testable, not aspirational — and where something is written into our code but not yet running automatically, we say so in the same sentence instead of rounding it up.

What a kids’ AI tool costs in the US

Price is not a quality signal in this category, but it is a real constraint, so here is the landscape in dollars.

Free is a serious option and you should exhaust it first. The ten activities on our AI activities guide need no account and no money. Scratch, from MIT, is free. Public libraries across the US run free technology programming for children. For a child under about grade 5, free is frequently sufficient, and the binding constraint is your attention rather than the tool.

Paid kids’ AI and coding products in the United States mostly sit between roughly $8 and $30 per month per child, with annual plans discounting that meaningfully. Luchi has one plan, Luchi Family, for the whole family: $99 a month, or $49 a month for founding families, covering every kid. Your first 7 days cost $5, charged when you start, and it then renews automatically each month unless you cancel before they end.

Two things to watch for regardless of who you buy from. Per-child pricing adds up fast in a family of three, so check whether a family plan exists before you commit to a monthly per-seat product. And be suspicious of any pricing model where your child’s engagement is what you are actually buying — daily streaks, currency that expires, pressure to return — because that is a business model aimed at you through your child.

US-specific questions

Is a "kids mode" on an adult AI app the same as a COPPA-compliant product?

No, and the difference is structural rather than a matter of degree. A kids mode is usually a content filter applied to an adult product whose terms still set the age floor at 13. A COPPA-compliant product for under-13s has to be built around verifiable parental consent, parental access, deletion and revocation — that is architecture, not a setting. Check the terms of service for the age line. If it says 13 and up, the kids mode does not change what the company has committed to.

Does COPPA compliance mean my child’s data is safe?

It means specific things are true: you consented, you can see it, you can delete it, and after 22 April 2026 there has to be a written security program and a written retention policy behind it. It does not mean the company cannot be breached, and it does not mean the data is not used to improve the service. Read what they say about training and third-party sharing — under the amended Rule, disclosure to third parties for purposes not integral to the service requires its own separate consent, so a company that does it has to tell you.

My child is 13. Does any of this still apply?

The federal protection described here applies to children under 13, so as a matter of law it stops. In practice, most of the judgement does not. The four-question test still works, the retention question is still worth asking, and a thirteen-year-old still benefits from a parent who has read the terms. What changes is that you are now the only person checking.

Run the four-question test on us

Luchi is built for kids specifically: restricted by design, projects with an ending, and a parent view of what your child practised.

Get on the list

Is AI safe for kids?

Part of the series: Teaching kids about AI

Related guides in this series

• How to explain AI to a child — Simple analogies and sample scripts by age (5–12), plus the three things every kid should understand about AI.
• AI activities for kids — 10 free, screen-smart activities to explore how AI works together — no coding, no sign-up, mostly off the screen.
• Fall break activities for kids — A half-day-by-half-day plan for five unstructured days — ten low-prep blocks, screen and off-screen alternating, ending with your child explaining what they made.