# Lune vs AnswerThis

AnswerThis puts the whole review in one web app: search, verify, screen, draft. Lune has no canvas. It puts search, full text and claim checking inside whatever you already write in.

Competitor site: https://answerthis.io.

## Choose AnswerThis if

- You want library, screening and manuscript in one place, with co-authors.
- Your review spans clinical trials, not only conference proceedings.
- Dual-reviewer screening and evidence grading are things you must produce.

## Choose Lune if

- You already draft somewhere you like and would rather not move.
- You want the retrieval available to any agent, through MCP.
- You would rather pay a few dollars than $35 a seat.
- Your field publishes at conferences and you need that full text quoted.

## From a question to a citation

AnswerThis: Search in the web app -> Draft on the canvas -> Verified citations.
Lune: Search from your agent -> Read the full text -> Quote with a locator.

One keeps the work in its own app. The other stays in yours.

## Line by line

| Dimension | Lune | AnswerThis |
| --- | --- | --- |
| What you use | Tools your agent calls, plus a CLI and three miniapps. | A web platform: canvas, library, writer, screening. |
| What is indexed | Top-tier venues, most papers in full text. | More than 250 million papers, trials and PDFs. |
| Agent access | MCP and a CLI, on every plan. | No MCP server or public API listed on their site. |
| How deep a citation goes | A verbatim quote and its locator, per claim. | Every source auto-verified; untraceable ones are dropped. |
| Systematic review output | None. Lune returns evidence; the protocol is yours. | PRISMA support, dual-reviewer screening, evidence grading. |
| Entry price | $4.99 a month, or $47.90 a year. | $35 per seat a month. |

## The workspace question comes first

AnswerThis starts from a fair premise: research has too many tools, so put the library, the screening and the draft in one place. Running a formal review with co-authors, that consolidation is worth real money.

Lune starts from the opposite one. The window you already work in is the workspace, and a research app is not going to replace it. So the retrieval ships as tools that window calls, and there is no Lune document to move your draft into.

## Verified against what

AnswerThis makes a strong claim: every source is auto-verified, and anything untraceable is dropped. That fixes the worst failure in this category, the fluent citation to a paper that does not exist.

The next failure is quieter. The paper exists, the citation resolves, and it still does not say what the sentence claims. Catching that needs the source text, not the record.

## Per seat, or per researcher

AnswerThis is $35 a seat, $75 for a lab of three, $250 for a site license. For a funded lab with a review to deliver, defensible.

Lune is free for 10 requests a day, $4.99 for 300, and a paid plan is shared with the team. Different products, priced for different rooms.

## Pricing

- Lune Free: $0, 10 requests a day, every tool
- Lune Pro: $4.99, a month or $47.90 a year, 300 requests a day
- Lune Max: $9.99, a month or $95.90 a year, 600 requests a day
- Lune Credits: $0.99, 300 extra requests, no expiry
- AnswerThis Free: $0, deep search, 5 saved projects
- AnswerThis Pro: $35, per seat a month
- AnswerThis Lab & Team: $75, annually, 3 seats minimum
- AnswerThis Max: $250, a month, site license

Read from their published pricing page.

## Questions

### Is Lune an AnswerThis alternative?

For grounded retrieval inside your own agent, yes. For PRISMA screening and a shared manuscript canvas, AnswerThis does things Lune does not.

### Does AnswerThis have an MCP server?

None is listed on their site. Their product is the web platform.

### Does Lune write the paper?

No. Your agent writes; Lune supplies and checks the evidence. Its Critique miniapp reviews a draft against reviewer expectations.

## What we read

- [answerthis.io](https://answerthis.io)
- [Pricing](https://answerthis.io/pricing)