Loading...
Flaex AI
You can feel the problem as soon as a long page goes live. The article is strong, the structure makes sense in the CMS, and the headings look fine in the editor. Then a reader lands on the page, starts scrolling, and has no fast way to jump to the section they need.
A table of content maker fixes that practical gap. It gives readers a working map, and it gives editors a repeatable way to keep long-form content usable as posts expand over time. On the web, that usability work often overlaps with accessibility, so if you are already improving long pages, this practical guide for skip link implementation is a useful companion.
Tool choice depends on the publishing environment more than the feature checklist. A WordPress plugin needs to behave well with themes, blocks, caching, and editors who do not touch code. A Markdown tool needs to fit a writing or documentation workflow, often with version control and automation in play. A JavaScript library belongs in a different conversation entirely, because now performance, selector control, and front-end implementation matter.
That is why this list is organized by use case first. It separates WordPress plugins, Markdown options, automation tools, browser-based generators, and developer libraries so you can match the tool to the job instead of forcing one workflow onto another. If you are comparing broader WordPress site-building options alongside TOC plugins, this 10Web AI WordPress builder overview is a relevant reference point, and teams that need implementation support can also draw on our WordPress expertise.
Easy Table of Contents is the WordPress option I'd put on a content-heavy site first when the requirement is broad compatibility. It auto-generates from H1 through H6, supports auto-insert by post type, and works across Classic Editor, Gutenberg, Elementor, Divi, WPBakery, and similar builders. That matters when a site has grown over time and content teams aren't using one editor consistently.
The free version is already capable. The Pro tier adds the extras larger editorial teams often ask for, including sticky or fixed TOCs, collapsible subheadings, “view more” behavior, AMP support, and ACF support. It also has a migration path from other TOC plugins, which is useful when you're cleaning up a site that has changed plugins more than once.
For WordPress operations, plugin sprawl is real. If you're already reviewing the rest of your stack, our WordPress expertise is relevant, especially for deciding whether a TOC plugin belongs in theme logic, a block workflow, or a dedicated plugin layer. Teams evaluating broader site tooling sometimes pair that review with 10Web on Flaex.ai when they want a wider AI-assisted WordPress build stack.
Easy Table of Contents is the safest pick when multiple people publish and nobody wants to babysit anchor links. You get granular control over placement and appearance, but that's also the downside. There are enough settings that someone needs to own the defaults.
Practical rule: Use this when consistency across many post types matters more than keeping the setup minimal.
A practical example: if your marketing team publishes pillar pages in Gutenberg, product marketing edits landing pages in Elementor, and support occasionally adds long docs in custom post types, this plugin handles that mixed environment better than block-only alternatives.
A common WordPress scenario looks like this: the editorial team writes everything in Gutenberg, the theme is block-based, and nobody wants another plugin with a long settings screen. SimpleTOC fits that setup well because it stays close to the editor instead of adding a separate management layer.
Its value is restraint. The plugin outputs a table of contents block without relying on front-end JavaScript, which keeps behavior predictable and reduces the odds of conflicts with performance plugins or aggressive script optimization. On smaller content sites, that matters more than a long feature list.
Use SimpleTOC when the decision framework is clear: Gutenberg is your primary editing environment, authors are comfortable placing a block manually, and the site does not need advanced TOC behavior across many templates. It works best for blogs, documentation sections, and resource hubs built around modern block themes.
The trade-off is just as clear. SimpleTOC does less, and that is either the reason to install it or the reason to skip it.
I'd pick this for a WordPress site where content editors build long posts entirely in Gutenberg and developers want to keep the front end simple. I would not pick it for a mixed WordPress environment with classic editor leftovers, page builder content, and older templates that need one TOC system applied everywhere.
LuckyWP Table of Contents is for teams that want a lot of control without moving into a paid plugin immediately. It auto-generates from headings, supports shortcodes and auto-insert behavior, and gives you control over heading depth, display rules, and presentation.
What makes it useful is how much it exposes in the free version. You can tune what appears, where it appears, and how it looks without hacking templates. For budget-conscious teams running long-form SEO content on WordPress, that's often the reason it stays installed.
I'd use LuckyWP when the editorial team wants options and doesn't mind a slightly heavier plugin. It's widely known in the WordPress ecosystem, so troubleshooting and implementation guidance are easier to find than with lesser-used plugins.
There is one operational caution. Stay current on updates. Feature-rich WordPress plugins are valuable, but they also need active maintenance in live environments.
Keep this one on sites where someone actually monitors plugin updates. Don't install it on a neglected content property and forget about it.
A practical example: if an SEO team wants the TOC title renamed, only H2 and H3 included, and insertion disabled on short posts while still available by shortcode on key pages, LuckyWP handles that kind of ruleset well. If your site standard is “fewer settings, fewer decisions,” it may feel like too much plugin for the job.
A common WordPress scenario: the content team is already using Gutenberg, the page needs to look finished without extra CSS work, and nobody wants to spend an hour tuning TOC behavior. Heroic Table of Contents fits that job well. It is a polished block built for teams that care about presentation first and customization second.
That distinction matters.
HeroThemes comes from the documentation and knowledge base side of WordPress, so the plugin feels aligned with structured content rather than generic blog decoration. You can choose heading levels, adjust list styling, and place the block where it makes sense in the article layout. It also supports multiple TOCs in one post, which is useful on long documentation pages with separate sections for setup, troubleshooting, and FAQs.
I'd choose Heroic Table of Contents for Gutenberg-first sites that want a clean result with minimal configuration. It works well for help centers, SaaS documentation, product education hubs, and polished editorial pages where design consistency matters more than edge-case controls.
The trade-off is straightforward. Heroic is not the plugin I'd pick for complex rule sets, legacy builder environments, or sites that need a lot of conditional insertion logic across hundreds of older posts. It is better as a well-designed block than as a heavily configurable TOC system.
A practical example: if a docs team has reusable page templates and wants editors to drop in a TOC block, keep only H2 and H3 headings, and publish without touching code, Heroic keeps that workflow clean. If your process includes converting draft material from other formats before publishing, a tool like Markdown to HTML and structured content conversion with Markdownify MCP can help upstream, while Heroic handles the on-page navigation layer inside WordPress.
If your team's requirement is simple. “Make the TOC look good, fit Gutenberg, and stay easy for editors.” Heroic is one of the clearer picks in this list.
Markdown All in One is the practical pick for developers and technical writers living in VS Code. It inserts and refreshes a TOC directly inside Markdown files, supports keyboard shortcuts, works with preview, and fits naturally into a Git-based documentation workflow.
The biggest benefit is that the TOC stays close to the writing process. You edit headings, refresh, commit, and the navigation lives in the file. For READMEs, internal docs, engineering handbooks, and docs-as-code environments, that's the right place for a TOC to exist.
This extension is strongest when the team already uses VS Code every day. It's not the right tool for non-technical writers who prefer browser editors or Word-style document workflows.
A practical example: a developer updates a setup guide with new H2 and H3 sections, refreshes the TOC, and commits the file in the same editing session. No external tool, no extra formatting pass. Teams working this way often evaluate adjacent developer productivity tools too, including GitHub Copilot on Flaex.ai, because the documentation workflow and coding workflow usually overlap.
Field note: If your docs live beside code, keeping TOC generation in the editor reduces missed updates and merge friction.
This category also has a known limitation. Static TOCs can break fast in collaborative environments where content changes constantly. A 2025 collaboration finding highlighted that 68% of document revisions in startup teams break static TOCs when tools only extract headings once, as described by Guidejar's table of contents generator page. Markdown All in One helps because refreshing is easy, but it still depends on people using it consistently.
DocToc is what I'd choose when TOC maintenance needs to be scriptable, repeatable, and enforceable. It's a Node.js command-line tool that inserts anchor-compatible TOCs into Markdown files and works well with GitHub, GitLab, and Bitbucket-oriented repositories.
This is less about convenience and more about process control. You can wire it into pre-commit hooks, CI steps, or build tooling so contributors don't have to remember TOC upkeep manually. If your team has dozens of Markdown docs and everyone edits differently, that enforcement matters.
DocToc fits DevOps-minded documentation teams. It's especially useful when repositories serve as internal product docs, onboarding manuals, or API references that need stable navigation.
A practical example: a startup keeps architecture docs in a monorepo. Every pull request runs checks, and DocToc updates changed Markdown files before merge. That makes the navigation predictable for every contributor. Teams exploring more AI-shaped Markdown and agent workflows may also look at Markdownify MCP on Flaex.ai, especially when documentation has to move between formats before TOCs are applied.
The core trade-off is simple. DocToc gives you discipline, but only if your team is comfortable with command-line tooling.
TOC Generator by Technote Space solves a different problem than DocToc. Instead of asking contributors to run local commands, it handles TOC updates in GitHub Actions on push or pull request. That changes who carries the responsibility. The repository does the work, not the writer.
For distributed teams, that's a practical win. New contributors don't need local setup just to keep navigation clean. Maintainers can standardize how TOCs are generated across a documentation set and use branch filters, labels, templates, or comment markers to control behavior.
This tool is ideal when you want Markdown TOCs maintained centrally in CI. It's narrowly scoped, and that's good. It doesn't pretend to solve PDFs, Word docs, or CMS content.
A practical example: an open-source project has many occasional contributors. Instead of documenting “run this TOC command before opening a PR,” the action updates the TOC automatically. That lowers contributor friction and cuts review noise.
The downside is setup overhead. Someone has to understand GitHub Actions well enough to configure and maintain the workflow. If your team doesn't already use CI for documentation, this may feel like infrastructure overkill for a simple navigation problem.
Still, for GitHub-native docs operations, this is often the cleaner answer than relying on personal editor extensions.
Tocbot is the right table of content maker when you don't want a plugin or external editing tool at all. It's a small JavaScript library that scans headings on an HTML page and renders a dynamic TOC. If you run a custom site, documentation portal, or static site generator, this is often the most flexible path.
It supports configurable selectors, sticky or sidebar layouts, and active-section highlighting while the reader scrolls. That last part is especially useful on long documentation pages because it reinforces where the user is, not just where they can go.
Tocbot works best when your team can touch templates and CSS. The implementation is usually quick, but the final polish is on you. You need to decide where the TOC mounts, how anchors behave, and how the sidebar or in-article block looks across breakpoints.
For custom documentation sites, this is often better than forcing a WordPress-style plugin mentality onto a front-end stack that doesn't need it.
A practical example: a product team hosts docs on a static site generator and wants a sticky left sidebar TOC with active heading highlighting. Tocbot fits that requirement cleanly. Builders prototyping this kind of behavior in lightweight environments sometimes test layouts in Replit on Flaex.ai before folding the implementation into a production front end.
Use Tocbot if you want control. Don't use it if your team expects a no-code UI with all styling decisions already made.
River is useful because it handles the messy intake scenario. You paste text or upload files in formats like DOCX, PDF, Markdown, HTML, or TXT, and it generates a structured clickable TOC in the browser. It also supports imports from public Google Docs, which makes it practical for teams that don't keep everything in one authoring system.
This kind of tool is best for one-off documents, fast internal processing, or mixed-format workflows where installing software would slow things down. It's not the best answer for sensitive material if browser-based processing is a concern.
River's strength is convenience, but there's an important edge case to understand. Standard heading-based extraction struggles with non-linear knowledge bases and recursive AI outputs. A 2025 finding noted that 74% of ML engineers working with GPTs and agents reported that standard TOC generators couldn't structure unstructured recursive data streams, as discussed on Microsoft Word training support. That's relevant if your “document” is really an evolving AI workflow log.
A practical example: HR exports a long policy draft from Google Docs, legal reviews a PDF version, and operations wants a quick TOC for internal review. River is good for that kind of cross-format handoff. Teams also exploring broader AI content workflows may compare adjacent content tools like Bloggy Automated Blog Post Writer on Flaex.ai, especially when drafting and structuring happen in the same pipeline.
If privacy, retention, or compliance rules are strict, use an on-prem or editor-native alternative instead.
A common handoff problem looks like this: the team already approved the document, the final file is a PDF, and nobody wants to reopen the source file just to add navigation. Aspose PDF Table of Contents Maker fits that use case. It lets you add a TOC or bookmarks in the browser, which is often enough to make a long PDF usable again.
That makes it a better fit for remediation than authoring. Reports, onboarding guides, investor decks, policy PDFs, and exported docs are the obvious candidates. If the source document still exists and the heading structure is messy, fixing the source usually produces a cleaner result than patching the PDF after export.
Choose Aspose when PDF is the final delivery format and speed matters more than editorial control. Skip it when you need design-level TOC styling, batch automation, or strict document handling rules that rule out browser-based tools.
The trade-off is straightforward. Web-based PDF tools are convenient for one-off fixes, but they sit later in the workflow. They solve the symptom, poor navigation in the final file, rather than the underlying document structure.
A practical example: a customer success team sends a 60-page onboarding manual to clients as PDF. The content is approved, but account managers keep answering basic "where is this section?" questions. Adding bookmarks through Aspose is faster than pulling the file back into Word, reformatting headings, exporting again, and checking for layout shifts.
Adobe explains that bookmarks help readers move through longer PDFs more efficiently in its documentation on PDF bookmarks. That is the lens to use here. Aspose is not the broadest table of content maker in this list, but it is one of the more practical choices when the problem starts and ends with a PDF.
| Tool | Core format & key features | Target (👥) | Quality (★) | Unique selling points (✨) | Price/value (💰) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Easy Table of Contents (WordPress) | WP plugin; auto-generate H1–H6, Pro sticky/collapsible | 👥 Content-heavy WordPress sites | ★★★★☆ (mature, stable) | ✨ Broad builder compatibility, migration tool, sticky ToC (Pro) | 💰 Free core + Paid Pro |
| SimpleTOC – Table of Contents Block (WordPress) | Gutenberg block, zero-config, JavaScript‑free | 👥 Modern block-theme editors | ★★★★☆ (minimal & fast) | ✨ Zero‑JS, FSE-native, accessible output | 💰 Free |
| LuckyWP Table of Contents (WordPress) | WP plugin; depth control, shortcodes, presets | 👥 Teams wanting many free options | ★★★★☆ (feature‑rich free) | ✨ Extensive settings & appearance presets | 💰 Free |
| Heroic Table of Contents (HeroThemes) | Gutenberg block with styled presets & responsive design | 👥 Marketing/docs sites seeking polished look | ★★★★☆ (polished UX) | ✨ Professional styling presets, vendor support | 💰 Paid / Premium |
| Markdown All in One (VS Code) | VS Code extension; insert & refresh ToC, preview & shortcuts | 👥 Developers maintaining Git docs | ★★★★★ (editor‑integrated) | ✨ Auto-update in-editor, keyboard shortcuts | 💰 Free |
| DocToc (CLI for Markdown) | Node CLI to generate/update Markdown ToCs; scriptable | 👥 Devs, CI & pre-commit workflows | ★★★★☆ (automation-friendly) | ✨ CLI + CI integration, scriptable | 💰 Free / OSS |
| TOC Generator (GitHub Action) | GitHub Action auto-generating ToCs on push/PR | 👥 Repo maintainers wanting CI automation | ★★★★☆ (CI-driven) | ✨ Auto-PR/commit, templates & folding support | 💰 Free |
| Tocbot (JavaScript library) | Dependency‑free JS lib; scroll-sync & active-section highlight | 👥 Custom sites & static site generators | ★★★★☆ (lightweight & interactive) | ✨ No deps, configurable selectors, sticky sidebars | 💰 Free |
| River – Free AI Table of Contents Generator | Browser AI tool; import DOCX/PDF/MD/HTML, Google Docs | 👥 Non-developers needing quick multi-format ToCs | ★★★☆☆ (convenient; web-based) | ✨ AI-assisted heading detection, multi-format import | 💰 Free |
| Aspose PDF Table of Contents Maker (web) | Web tool to add ToC/bookmarks to PDFs; preserves structure | 👥 Users with existing PDFs needing navigation | ★★★☆☆ (fast, limited editing) | ✨ PDF bookmark/ToC generation without install | 💰 Free (web) |
You have one real decision to make. Pick the tool that matches where your headings are created and who is responsible for keeping them clean.
That framing matters because a WordPress plugin, a VS Code extension, a CLI, a GitHub Action, a JavaScript library, and a PDF web tool solve different maintenance problems. They do not compete on equal terms. A marketing team publishing long-form posts in Gutenberg should not evaluate tools the same way a docs team maintaining Markdown in Git, or an operations team patching navigation into finished PDFs.
For WordPress, the trade-off is mostly between editor fit, design control, and setup overhead. Easy Table of Contents is the safer option for broader theme and builder compatibility. SimpleTOC fits teams that work inside Gutenberg and want less plugin complexity. LuckyWP gives more tuning in a free plugin, which is useful if you need control and can tolerate a larger settings surface. Heroic Table of Contents makes more sense when presentation matters and paying for a cleaner package is acceptable.
For Markdown, ownership decides the winner. Markdown All in One works best when contributors edit directly in VS Code and can refresh the TOC as part of writing. DocToc is better for teams that prefer scripted consistency across files. TOC Generator by Technote Space fits repositories where maintainers want automation in CI instead of relying on each contributor to remember local steps.
Custom sites and document conversion workflows need a different filter. Tocbot is the practical choice when your team controls front-end templates and wants an interactive HTML TOC with active-section behavior. River is useful for fast browser-based work across mixed file formats. Aspose PDF Table of Contents Maker is the right fix when the PDF is already final and the job is to add usable navigation without reopening the source file.
One pattern shows up across every category. Clean heading structure determines whether any TOC tool works well. Microsoft explains that Word builds a table of contents from applied heading styles, not from visual formatting alone, in its support guide for creating a table of contents in Word. The same rule applies in WordPress blocks, Markdown files, HTML templates, and PDFs generated from source documents. If heading levels are inconsistent, the tool can only reproduce that inconsistency faster.
Choose for maintenance first, features second. The best table of content maker is the one your team will keep using without extra cleanup, manual fixes, or arguments about who owns updates.
Flaex.ai helps teams cut through that evaluation work faster. If you're comparing AI-assisted writing, developer, documentation, and workflow tools alongside your table-of-content stack, explore Flaex.ai to review products side by side, filter by use case, and build a more coherent toolset without wasting cycles on scattered research.