{
  "schema_version": 2,
  "kind": "shortening-method",
  "format": "agent-skill",
  "id": "comparison-summary",
  "name": "Comparison summary",
  "category": "Writing",
  "summary": "Compress alternatives into matched criteria, trade-offs, and known gaps.",
  "use_cases": [
    "Option comparisons",
    "Product shortlists",
    "Approach trade-offs"
  ],
  "word_count": 142,
  "url": "https://sho.rten.it/methods/comparison-summary/",
  "instructions_url": "https://sho.rten.it/methods/comparison-summary/SKILL.md",
  "skill_url": "https://sho.rten.it/methods/comparison-summary/SKILL.md",
  "json_url": "https://sho.rten.it/methods/comparison-summary/llms.txt",
  "plain_text_url": "https://sho.rten.it/methods/comparison-summary/prompt.txt",
  "license": "MIT",
  "sources_url": "https://sho.rten.it/sources/#comparison-summary",
  "skill_name": "comparison-summary",
  "skill_description": "Compress alternatives into matched criteria, trade-offs, and known gaps. Use for Option comparisons, Product shortlists, Approach trade-offs.",
  "agents_md_url": "https://sho.rten.it/methods/comparison-summary/AGENTS.md",
  "sources": [],
  "instructions": "Shorten the supplied comparison so a reader can distinguish the options quickly. Use the same relevant criteria for every option. Choose criteria from the user's decision or the source; do not invent a scoring system.\n\nUse a compact table when there are several shared criteria, or parallel bullets for a short comparison. Keep units, pricing periods, operating conditions, and material exceptions aligned. Mark missing information as unknown or not provided. Do not turn an omitted feature into proof that it is absent. State a conditional preference only when the supplied priorities and evidence support one; otherwise describe the trade-off without declaring a winner.\n\nRemove repeated descriptions, generic advantages, and facts that do not distinguish the alternatives. Preserve uncertainty and the source of disputed claims. Do not compare incompatible measurements as though they were equivalent. Return only the comparison and any necessary qualification.",
  "example": {
    "context": "Archive-plan comparison with incomplete decision criteria",
    "before": "We are comparing two archive plans for a team that needs to store 400 GB. Plan A includes 500 GB and costs $12 per month. It includes one user and retains deleted files for 30 days. Plan B includes 1 TB and costs $18 per month. It includes five users and retains deleted files for seven days. Both plans allow monthly cancellation. Neither description states a restore-speed guarantee. We have not yet decided how many users need access or how long deleted files must remain recoverable, so we cannot select a plan yet.",
    "after": "Both plans cover 400 GB and allow monthly cancellation.\n\n| Criterion | Plan A | Plan B |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| Storage | 500 GB | 1 TB |\n| Monthly cost | $12 | $18 |\n| Users | 1 | 5 |\n| Deleted-file retention | 30 days | 7 days |\n\nRestore-speed guarantees are unspecified. Choose after setting user-count and retention needs.",
    "must_preserve": [
      "Storage, monthly prices, included users, and retention periods",
      "Both meet 400 GB and allow monthly cancellation",
      "Restore guarantee is unknown, not absent",
      "No selection until user and retention needs are known"
    ],
    "omitted": [
      "Removes repeated plan introductions and presents each criterion once."
    ],
    "kind": "illustrative"
  }
}