91 lines
2.7 KiB
Markdown
91 lines
2.7 KiB
Markdown
# {{PRODUCT_CATEGORY}} — Comparison Report
|
|
|
|
**Researched:** {{date}}
|
|
**Context:** {{what the platform needs — portal, workflow, compliance, constraints}}
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Comparison Matrix
|
|
|
|
When evaluating 5-10 candidates, use this matrix as the first-pass eliminator:
|
|
|
|
| Tool | Self-Hosted | License/Cost | REST API | Raw SQL | {{DB1}} | {{DB2}} | {{DB3}} | MCP | Setup Time | Verdict |
|
|
|------|:-----------:|:-----------:|:--------:|:-------:|:-------:|:-------:|:-------:|:---:|:----------:|:-------:|
|
|
| {{Tool A}} | ✅ | ✅ MIT | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ❌ | ✅ | ✅ Native | <1 min | 🏆 Win |
|
|
| {{Tool B}} | ✅ | ❌ paid | ✅ | 🔶 limited | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ❌ | ~30 min | ❌ Ruled out |
|
|
|
|
**Required criteria:** {{list must-haves — e.g. MySQL+SQLite+Postgres support, raw SQL API, free self-hosted}}
|
|
**Nice-to-haves:** {{MCP support, single-binary, low resource requirements}}
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Winner: {{TOOL NAME}}
|
|
|
|
- **License:** {{MIT/Apache/AGPL}} — free forever or has gating
|
|
- **Summary:** {{why it won — concisely}}
|
|
- **Why not the others:** {{specific disqualifiers for top alternatives}}
|
|
|
|
### Hermes Integration
|
|
|
|
**MCP Server Config (`~/.hermes/config.yaml`):**
|
|
```yaml
|
|
mcp_servers:
|
|
{{tool}}:
|
|
command: {{...}}
|
|
args: [{{...}}]
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
**Direct REST/CLI usage:**
|
|
```bash
|
|
{{setup and first query commands}}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Key Features
|
|
- {{feature 1}}
|
|
- {{feature 2}}
|
|
- {{feature 3}}
|
|
|
|
### Caveats
|
|
- {{gotchas, pitfalls, missing features}}
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Runners-Up
|
|
|
|
### {{Tool 2}}
|
|
- **What's good:** {{}}
|
|
- **Why not #1:** {{}}
|
|
|
|
### {{Tool 3}}
|
|
- **What's good:** {{}}
|
|
- **Why not #1:** {{}}
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Eliminated Candidates
|
|
|
|
| Tool | Disqualifier |
|
|
|------|:-------------|
|
|
| {{Tool A}} | {{e.g. PostgreSQL only, no MySQL}} |
|
|
| {{Tool B}} | {{e.g. API is enterprise-only, free edition has no API}} |
|
|
| {{Tool C}} | {{e.g. Unmaintained, last release 2014}} |
|
|
| {{Tool D}} | {{e.g. GUI only, no programmatic API}} |
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Research Methodology
|
|
|
|
1. **Find candidates** via web search (category keyword + alternatives)
|
|
2. **First-pass batch** — visit GitHub, pricing page, docs in parallel for each
|
|
3. **Build matrix** — use the comparison table to eliminate obvious rejects
|
|
4. **Deep-dive** remaining 2-3 — exact setup, API endpoints, MCP config
|
|
5. **Verify claims** — some advertise "API" but it's enterprise-only or docs-gated. Read the actual docs, not the marketing site
|
|
6. **Save reference** — write findings to a `references/` file under the applicable skill
|
|
|
|
## Data Sources
|
|
|
|
- GitHub API: `/repos/{owner}/{repo}` — stars, forks, open issues, license
|
|
- Docker Hub API: `/v2/repositories/{owner}/{image}/` — pull count, size
|
|
- Pricing pages: web_extract + grep for `$` amounts / plan keywords
|
|
- Documentation: check actual docs URL, not marketing page claims
|