Platform overview
Understand what AI Glot translates, when it is a good fit, and how a file moves from upload through review to a structure-safe result.
AI Glot is built for structured content that already lives in a file: product catalogues, CMS exports, localization tables, app resource files, subtitle tracks and marketplace feeds. Twelve format families are accepted. See Files and formats.
When AI Glot is a good fit
Product and ecommerce data
Translate titles, descriptions, metadata and attributes without changing product IDs or import columns.
Localization tables
Fill one or several language columns from a shared source column.
CMS and database exports
Translate selected fields while keeping keys, slugs and operational columns untouched.
Whole-table translation
Translate every non-empty text value when the whole file is intended for another language.
AI Glot is not an editor and does not redesign your data. It preserves the file’s structure (keys, columns, placeholders, timecodes), so the result can return to the system that exported it.
The workflow
Reading the file and planning are free. Credits are reserved only when you approve the plan and its cost. If a translation fails, its reservation is returned automatically.
You describe the scope, in words
There is no grid of column dropdowns to configure. You say what you want (“the product descriptions into German, leave the SKUs alone”, “everything except the URLs”, “only the rows where the French column is empty”), and AI Glot answers with a plan you can read three ways: as a visual preview of the finished file, as the exact list of items it will send, and as the rules it understood in plain words.
If it misread something, you say what to change rather than hunting for the setting that caused it. Every round of this is free; only approval spends credits. The walkthrough is in Translate a file.
Ways to operate AI Glot
| Interface | Best for | Can start a translation? |
|---|---|---|
| Web app | Day-to-day use, and reviewing a plan visually | Yes |
| REST API | Integrations and HTTP automation | Yes |
| MCP | ChatGPT, Claude, Cursor and agent frameworks | Yes |
| CLI | Terminal, CI and coding agents | Yes |
All four run the same three steps, because the plan is meant to be read before it is paid for: create, plan, approve. The interfaces differ in who reads the plan. In the web app you do, visually. Over the API, MCP or the CLI, your integration reads it back and decides, and approval is the only step that spends credits.