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.
The 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.
Replace the variables
[OPTIONS]Two to four named options.
[CRITERIA]The axes you actually care about.
[CONSTRAINTS]Budget, team size, must-haves.
Which model to use
- Gemini 3.1 Pro — Balancing multiple criteria benefits from stronger reasoning.
Example input
- [OPTIONS] = "Stripe vs Creem". [USE CASE] = "SaaS subscriptions".
Example output
We only publish example outputs from real model runs. This template has not been formally tested yet, so no output is shown. Run it yourself with the input above.
Why this structure works
- Naming criteria up front prevents the model from picking flattering ones.
- Splitting facts from marketing exposes claims that need checking.
Common failures & fixes
Recommendation ignores your constraints.
Fix: Repeat the constraints and ask it to justify against each one.
Known limitations
- Vendor details change; verify pricing and limits directly.