Compare 2 options on 3 criteria, keep every claim attached to evidence, and finish with a decision memo that shows what still needs testing.
For: business owners, operators, and content teams preparing a narrow product comparison.
You will create: a scoped question, an evidence table, a reviewed comparison, and one next-check plan. This is not a market ranking or a purchase recommendation.
Downloads: Blank evidence-table template · Completed example table
1. Define the decision before researching
Write one decision in this form:
We are comparing [OPTION A] and [OPTION B] for [USE CASE], using only [CRITERION 1], [CRITERION 2], and [CRITERION 3].
Good criteria are observable. For a data-transfer decision, use criteria such as export format, documented conditions, and known omissions. Avoid broad labels such as best, easiest, or most powerful unless you define a test.
Scope card
| Field | Your entry |
|---|---|
| Decision | [DECISION THIS COMPARISON SUPPORTS] |
| Option A | [NAME] |
| Option B | [NAME] |
| Criterion 1 | [OBSERVABLE CRITERION] |
| Criterion 2 | [OBSERVABLE CRITERION] |
| Criterion 3 | [OBSERVABLE CRITERION] |
| Evidence cutoff | [DATE AND TIME] |
| Reviewer | [NAME OR ROLE] |
2. Build the evidence table
Copy the CSV file supplied with this guide or use this table:
| Option | Criterion | Claim | Source URL | Checked date | Supporting passage | Fact or inference | Unknown | Next check |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [A/B] | [CRITERION] | [ONE NARROW CLAIM] | [DIRECT URL] | [DATE] | [SHORT PASSAGE OR PRECISE LOCATION] | [FACT/INFERENCE] | [MISSING EVIDENCE] | [TEST OR SOURCE] |
One row should contain one claim. If a sentence includes a capability, a plan condition, and a quality judgment, split it into 3 rows.
3. Use the scoping prompt
Compare [OPTION A] and [OPTION B] only for [USE CASE] and only on these criteria: [LIST 3 CRITERIA].
Use the supplied public sources. For every factual claim, return the direct source URL, checked date, and the exact passage or section that supports it. Separate documented fact from inference. Mark missing evidence UNKNOWN.
Return a Markdown table with: option, criterion, claim, source URL, checked date, supporting passage, fact or inference, unknown, and next check.
Do not rank the products, infer export quality, or recommend a purchase. Stop if a criterion cannot be compared from the supplied evidence.4. Worked example: Notion and Trello CSV export
This is an editorial research example based on official documentation reviewed on 8 September 2026. No export was performed. Transfer speed, field quality, and fit for a particular team's data remain unknown.
| Option | Criterion | Supported claim | Official source | Scope and condition | Unknown or next check |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Notion | CSV availability | A full-page database can be exported as CSV through the Markdown and CSV export option. | Notion: Export your content | The documentation describes full-page databases. | Export a safe sample database and inspect columns. |
| Notion | View handling | A database export uses either the current view or the default view. Exporting every view at once is not supported. | Notion: Export your content | This is a documented export choice, not a guarantee that every property appears as expected. | Compare current-view and default-view files. |
| Notion | Content boundary | Full-page database content is exported as CSV, while subpages are represented separately in the Markdown and CSV package. | Notion: Export your content | Callout blocks may export as HTML because Markdown has no equivalent. | Inspect how linked or embedded content appears. |
| Trello | CSV availability | Board export to CSV is available to Premium workspaces. | Atlassian: Export data from Trello | The plan condition is part of the claim. | Confirm the workspace's current plan before testing. |
| Trello | Included data | The CSV includes board data organized into columns. | Atlassian: Export data from Trello | Documentation, not a completed export test. | Export a safe sample board and map required fields. |
| Trello | Known omission | Card comments are not included in the CSV export. | Atlassian: Export data from Trello | A material boundary if comments contain task context. | Decide whether JSON or another process is required. |
Fact versus inference
Documented fact: both products document a CSV export path under stated conditions.
Unsupported inference: either product is the best migration choice.
The inference needs the team's actual schema, required fields, permissions, plan, sample-file results, and an acceptance test. Documentation alone cannot settle it.
5. Run the claim audit
Review the evidence table row by row. For each row, check whether the cited passage supports the entire claim.
Flag: scope expansion, missing plan or permission conditions, omitted limitations, stale evidence, fact presented as inference, inference presented as fact, and duplicated claims.
Return PASS, REVISE, or UNKNOWN for every row. Quote the unsupported phrase and suggest a narrower correction. Do not guess and do not turn a proposed correction into a verified fact.6. Example decision memo
Decision being prepared: choose a safe sample-export test for a task migration.
What the documentation supports: Notion documents CSV export for full-page databases and limits the view choice to current or default. Trello documents board CSV export for Premium workspaces and states that comments are excluded.
What remains unknown: neither documentation set shows how this team's fields, relations, attachments, checklists, or naming conventions will transfer. No export duration or output-quality test was performed.
Next check: the operations owner creates equivalent sample records with non-sensitive data in both products. The reviewer exports each sample, compares required fields against a fixed checklist, records omissions, and rejects any route that loses required context. The owner then makes the decision from the files, plan conditions, and migration effort.
Final checklist
- [ ] One decision, 2 options, and 3 observable criteria are defined.
- [ ] Every factual row has a direct source and checked date.
- [ ] Plan, view, permission, and omission conditions stay attached to the claim.
- [ ] Facts and inferences are labeled separately.
- [ ] Unknowns remain visible.
- [ ] No export is described as tested unless someone actually ran and documented it.
- [ ] The memo names the next check and its owner.
Continue on NEXAIUM
Use the resulting evidence brief as the Research input in The 3-Step AI Workflow, then draft and reuse only the claims your reviewer approved.
Official sources
- Notion: Export your content, reviewed 8 September 2026.
- Atlassian: Export data from Trello, reviewed 8 September 2026.