How to Verify Every Cell in an AI-Generated Software Feature Comparison Table
If an AI-generated comparison table says one app “has” a feature and another “doesn’t,” treat each cell as a claim to verify—not a fact. For every claim, identify the exact feature, product version or plan, platform, and date of the official documentation that supports it. This guide is for readers checking a software comparison before relying on or sharing it. The key is to turn broad labels into testable statements, then record evidence at the same level of detail.
Define what each cell is claiming
A cell such as “offline access: yes” is too broad to verify. Does it mean viewing a document, editing it, or syncing changes later? Is it available on the web, desktop, or mobile app? Does the answer depend on the plan or on setup?
Rewrite the claim before researching it. For example: “On the free plan, a user can edit selected pages offline in the desktop app after enabling offline access.” That sentence gives you several checks: plan, action, content selection, platform, and prerequisite. If the table cannot be made that precise, mark the cell as ambiguous instead of guessing what “yes” means.
Check plan and platform before marking yes or no
Start with the vendor’s current pricing or plan comparison page, then open the relevant product help page. A pricing page can show that a capability varies by tier; help documentation often explains the conditions for using it.
For example, Notion’s [pricing comparison](https://www.notion.com/pricing) lists page history periods by plan and describes offline access as a feature available in the desktop and mobile apps, with different behavior across tiers. A cell reading “offline: yes” would hide meaningful distinctions: the table should identify the plan, app, and which pages are available offline. If a source describes only a paid tier, it does not establish availability on the free plan.
Use one row per product-plan-platform combination when those conditions change the answer. Otherwise, label the conditions in the cell or a clearly linked note. Do not copy a feature name from a vendor page and assume every user can use it in every version.
Verify the behavior, not just the feature label
Open the official help article and look for the exact action the table claims is possible. Check whether it requires a setting, administrator permission, a particular app, or a specific workflow. Record those prerequisites beside the claim.
Google’s [instructions for working offline in Docs, Sheets, and Slides](https://support.google.com/docs/answer/6388102?hl=en) describe setup requirements, including using a supported browser and enabling offline access. That evidence supports a conditional claim about offline work; it would not support an unqualified statement that every user can work offline immediately in every browser. Keep the documented action and its conditions together so the table does not imply more than the source says.
Track dates and changes that alter the answer
Record when you checked a source and whether the source provides an effective date or change notice. A checked date tells readers when your evidence was current; it is not a promise that the product has not changed since.
Slack’s [documentation on free-plan limits](https://slack.com/help/articles/27204752526611-Feature-limitations-on-the-free-version-of-Slack) says free workspaces can access only the most recent 90 days of message and file history, and that data more than a year old is deleted; it also identifies August 26, 2024 as the start of the deletion change. A table that simply says “message history: limited” loses both the threshold and the date-sensitive consequence. Include the limit, plan, and applicable date in the cell or its note.
When the documentation does not state when a change took effect, record your access date and avoid presenting it as a dated product guarantee. If the page is silent or conflicts with another official page, mark the cell “unclear” and seek a more specific official source.
Keep a source trail for every cell
A useful evidence log can be a companion sheet with one row per claim and these columns: product, feature, exact claim, plan, platform, prerequisites, source title and URL, relevant passage or section, effective date if stated, and date checked. Link the cell to its evidence row, or place a concise citation in the cell’s note.
This makes revisions manageable. If a vendor updates one plan or retires one platform workflow, you can identify the affected claims without rechecking the entire table. Preserve the source page’s meaning in your notes; avoid relying on a search result snippet, an AI summary, or a third-party roundup as proof of what the vendor currently supports.
Resolve uncertainty without inventing an answer
Use “not stated in the checked documentation” when the source does not answer the question. Use “not available on this plan” only when an official source explicitly establishes that limitation. Distinguish “unsupported,” “not included,” and “not verified”; they mean different things.
If official pages disagree, first check their dates, plan names, regions, and platform scope. Then look for a current, more specific vendor article or release note. If the conflict remains, describe it and leave the cell unresolved. A visible uncertainty is more useful than a confident yes/no that silently combines different versions or conditions.