| name | or-compare-models |
| description | Use when the user wants to compare two or more OpenRouter models head-to-head. Triggers on phrases like "compare <model-a> and <model-b> on OpenRouter", "head-to-head OR comparison", "which is better — <model-a> or <model-b>", "side-by-side OpenRouter models", "diff these OR models". |
Head-to-Head OpenRouter Model Comparison
Build a structured side-by-side comparison of two or more OpenRouter models so the user can choose between them.
When to use
The user has named 2+ specific OpenRouter models (or asked to compare picks from a previous recommendation) and wants a structured comparison.
Workflow
Step 1: Identify the models
If the user named the models, take their IDs as-is. If they referenced them indirectly ("compare the two cheapest tool-calling models"), first run the relevant filter (via or-find-tool-models) and pick the targets.
If a model ID is ambiguous or not found in the catalog, ask for clarification before proceeding.
Step 2: Fetch catalog data
curl -s https://openrouter.ai/api/v1/models -H "Accept: application/json"
Extract each target model's record.
Step 3: Build the comparison table
Render a markdown table with one column per model and one row per dimension. Recommended rows:
| Dimension | Model A | Model B |
|---|
| Provider | | |
| Context length | | |
| Max output tokens | | |
| Input modalities | | |
| Output modalities | | |
| Prompt $/1M tokens | | |
| Completion $/1M tokens | | |
| Image $/each (if vision) | | |
| Tool use support | yes/no | yes/no |
| Structured outputs | yes/no | yes/no |
| Tokenizer | | |
| Created (date) | | |
| Top provider context | | |
| Per-request limits | | |
Step 4: Add a written summary
Below the table, write a 3–5 sentence summary highlighting:
- Where the models meaningfully differ (price ratio, context ratio, capability gaps)
- What each is better suited for, based on the differences
- A clear "if X matters most, pick A; if Y matters most, pick B" verdict
Step 5: Offer to deepen the analysis
End with: "Want me to research either of these models beyond the OR catalog (model card, benchmarks, license)?" — route to or-evaluate-model if yes.
Notes
- Don't bring in benchmark scores or qualitative judgments from memory. Stick to catalog facts in the table. Save subjective comparisons for the summary, and clearly mark them as your interpretation.
- If comparing more than 3 models, the table gets unwieldy — suggest grouping into pairs or running a recommendation flow instead.
- If two models are nearly identical (same family, e.g.
gpt-4o vs gpt-4o-2024-08-06), say so explicitly and explain what differs (typically date / pricing tier).
