Free tool

Three ways to answer that review, in about ten seconds

The reply is not for the person who wrote the review. It is for the next customer reading it. Paste what they said, pick your trade and a tone, and get three different approaches to choose between. No sign-up, no email, nothing stored.

Write a reply

Coming soon

This one is built and is not switched on yet. It goes live shortly, and when it does it will be free and ungated like the rest of them, with no sign-up and nothing stored.

In the meantime, the missed call text back tool writes the messages a missed call needs, and it works now.

How to use it

Paste the review

Good, bad or somewhere in between. Google, Facebook, TripAdvisor, anywhere. Leave it exactly as the customer wrote it.

Say what kind of business you are

This changes more than the wording. A health practice and a restaurant have different rules about what a public reply may say, and those rules are built in.

Pick a tone

Warm, professional or brief. Brief is the right answer more often than owners expect, especially on a negative review.

Take one and edit it

You get three different approaches, not three rewordings. The one you send should still sound like you.

What it will not do, and why that matters

Most review-reply tools will happily write whatever you ask for. This one has a fixed set of refusals per business type, because the fastest way to make a review situation worse is to publish a commitment you cannot keep.

  • It never promises money. No refund, no discount, no credit, no free service, no price of any kind. Those are yours to offer privately.
  • It never accepts liability. On a trades, automotive or professional review, admitting a specific fault in public is a decision for you and possibly your insurer, not for a draft.
  • It never invents. Not the customer's name, not the staff member's name, not what happened. It only knows what the review says.
  • It never confirms someone was a client or patient. On the health and professional services options this is the strictest rule, and it holds even when the reviewer said so themselves.

The reply is only half of it

Answering reviews well is worth doing and it is downstream of the actual problem, which is usually that nobody asked for the review in the first place. Review volume is the thing that moves a map ranking, and it comes from asking at the moment the customer is happiest.

If the reviews you are answering are mostly about nobody picking up the phone, that is a different fix. The missed call text back tool writes the messages, and the speed to lead guide covers why response time decides so much of this.

The wider argument about why AI-written copy reads as generic, and what to do about it, is in the voice pass. Everything this tool drafts should still get a pass from you before it goes out.

The companion guide

Why AI written copy reads as generic, and the pass that fixes it

Where this applies

AI systems for venues, promoters and restaurants where every night is its own deadline

AI systems for studios and clinics where an empty slot is revenue that never comes back

AI systems for studios where the booking happens in the DMs

Review reply FAQ

Why three replies instead of one?
Because there is rarely one correct response to a review. A negative review can be answered by apologising, by taking it offline, or by politely correcting the record, and which of those is right depends on things the tool cannot know. Three genuinely different approaches let you pick, which is faster than asking one draft to be rewritten twice.
Do you store the reviews I paste?
No. The text is held in memory for as long as the request takes and is never written to a database, a log or an analytics event. There is no account and no email capture. The only thing that outlives your request is a short-lived counter that stops one person running hundreds of these.
Will it offer the customer a refund or a free meal?
No, and that is enforced rather than hoped for. Every business type carries an instruction never to promise a refund, a discount, a credit or a free service, because those are commitments only you can make and a public one is hard to walk back. Where a reply needs to offer something, it offers a conversation.
I am a clinic. Is it safe to reply to reviews at all?
Replying is normal, but the rules are stricter than most owners realise, and the health option here is written to that. It never confirms or implies that the reviewer was a patient, never references clinical detail even when the reviewer raised it first, and keeps the reply general with an offline route. If your professional body has its own guidance, that still governs.
Can it reply in French?
Yes. It replies in the language the review is written in, so a French review gets a French reply without you changing a setting.
Should I reply to every review?
To every negative one and to most positive ones. The audience for a reply is not the reviewer, it is the next person reading, and a page of complaints with no responses reads very differently from the same complaints each answered calmly. That is also the argument for making replies fast enough that you actually do it.
What does it do with an abusive or fake review?
It flags that it looks like one and keeps the drafts short, neutral and non-engaging, which is the right handling. It will not draft a rebuttal. Arguing publicly with a bad-faith reviewer is the one move that reliably makes things worse.