Ask Gemini to compare options on the criteria that matter to you, separate facts from marketing, and end with a recommendation tied to your specific constraints.
El prompt
Compare [OPTIONS] for [USE CASE]. Score them on [CRITERIA]. Separate verifiable facts from vendor marketing claims. Show a comparison table, then give one recommendation tied to my constraints: [CONSTRAINTS]. Flag anything you are unsure about.
Reemplaza las variables
[OPTIONS]Two to four named options.
[CRITERIA]The axes you actually care about.
[CONSTRAINTS]Budget, team size, must-haves.
Qué modelo usar
- Gemini 3.1 Pro — Balancing multiple criteria benefits from stronger reasoning.
Entrada de ejemplo
- [OPTIONS] = "Stripe vs Creem". [USE CASE] = "SaaS subscriptions".
Resultado de ejemplo
Solo publicamos resultados de ejemplo de ejecuciones reales del modelo. Esta plantilla aún no se ha probado formalmente, por lo que no se muestra ningún resultado. Ejecútala tú mismo con la entrada de arriba.
Por qué funciona esta estructura
- Naming criteria up front prevents the model from picking flattering ones.
- Splitting facts from marketing exposes claims that need checking.
Fallos comunes y soluciones
Recommendation ignores your constraints.
Solución: Repeat the constraints and ask it to justify against each one.
Limitaciones conocidas
- Vendor details change; verify pricing and limits directly.