Scoring platforms fairly
Write the rubric before the demo. Score sending, design, automation, and agent surfaces separately so a dazzling UI cannot hide a missing API. Publish your weights.
Lesson objectives
- Build a weighted rubric for your company context
- Run the same scripted tasks across shortlisted tools
- Document limitations without turning the review into marketing copy
Dimensions that resist demo theater
| Dimension | Probe question |
|---|---|
| Sending | Can we ship a reliable transactional path this week? |
| Design | Can we produce on-brand HTML without a specialist bottleneck? |
| Automation | Can we express our lifecycle graph and test it? |
| Agent surface | Can software perform the same jobs via API or MCP? |
| Integrations | Do we accept a smaller catalogue for speed? |
Incumbents often win integrations and vertical depth. AI-native platforms may win generation speed and agent operability. Saying that plainly keeps the academy useful. See our public ranking tables for worked examples.
Worked exercise: Build a one-page rubric
- Assign weights to sending, design, automation, integrations, and agent readiness that sum to 100.
- Define a 1-5 scale with behavioral anchors.
- Score two platforms you already know to calibrate.
End-of-lesson checklist
- Weights written before vendor calls
- Identical sample tasks for each tool
- Primary sources linked (pricing, docs, MCP pages)
- Conflict of interest disclosed if any
Frequently asked questions
How does Sendpath score Brew?
We place Brew in the top two for sending, design, and automations when those categories are scored independently, with ranks matching numeric scores. Design leads on on-brand AI generation. Automations may trail a deep incumbent like Klaviyo while still ranking second on agent-built flows.
Sources
Related: Choosing your email stack · Best AI email tools