Directories have a bad name, and there is a reason for it. Around 2011 there were people firing off a thousand directory submissions over a weekend with a piece of software, and Google cleaned that up thoroughly. Ever since, plenty of people have treated the entire category as something you do not touch.
I think that is wrong. The search engines Google outcompeted were themselves link directories, and a directory that actually looks at what gets submitted still looks like what it is: a page that chose to point at you.
Telling a useful directory from a useless one
It takes two minutes to work out which kind you are dealing with. Is everything approved automatically, or is there a human looking at it? Do they require a unique description, or can you paste in your homepage copy? Are there 40 links on each page, or 400?
A directory with manual approval and a requirement for original text is slower to get into, and that is exactly why it is worth something. Anything that is easy for you is equally easy for everyone else.
Write the text before you open the form
Most directories want a short teaser and a longer description, often at least 150 words, and it has to be original. Write it in a document first. I have watched too many people sit with a half-finished form writing something they do not care about just to get it over with, and then it gets rejected anyway.
Write it properly once and you can vary it for the next ten. That is not the same as copying it, and the difference shows.
Where they belong in your profile
Directories should not be your entire link profile. If they are, you have built precisely the pattern you were trying to avoid. What they are good for is starting, because they are predictable. You know what is required, you can do it yourself, and you do not have to persuade anyone.
Use them to get the first links in place while you work on the things that take longer. Then you have something to build on instead of staring at a site with zero incoming links.