# Metric definition reconciliation

> Use when two tools report different numbers for the same thing and people are arguing about it.

## Fill in before running

- `{{METRIC_NAME}}`
- `{{SOURCE_A}}`
- `{{VALUE_A}}`
- `{{SOURCE_B}}`
- `{{VALUE_B}}`
- `{{PERIOD}}`
- `{{TRACKING_SETUP}}`
- `{{ACCEPTABLE_VARIANCE}}`

## Prompt

```
Two sources disagree about the same metric. Explain the gap before anyone picks a favourite.

Metric: {{METRIC_NAME}}
Source A: {{SOURCE_A}} reports {{VALUE_A}}
Source B: {{SOURCE_B}} reports {{VALUE_B}}
Period: {{PERIOD}}
Setup details: {{TRACKING_SETUP}}

Output:
1. Definition table: Source | How this source defines the metric | Counting unit | De-duplication rule | Time zone | Attribution or session rule.
2. Ranked list of likely causes of the gap, largest suspected contribution first, each with the rough size of the effect and how to test it.
3. Which parts of the gap are expected and permanent, and which indicate a genuine setup error.
4. Which source to use for which question. Neither is "correct" for everything.
5. A one-paragraph explanation for a non-technical stakeholder that does not blame either tool.

Rules:
- A gap under {{ACCEPTABLE_VARIANCE}} percent from known definitional differences is normal. Say so plainly rather than hunting for a bug.
- Do not guess at a cause you cannot describe a test for.
- If you need a detail about the setup that I have not given, list it as a question rather than assuming.
- No em dashes.
```

## Getting a better result

- Time zone and de-duplication explain most gaps; check those before touching the tracking code.
- Write section 4 into your reporting notes so this argument only happens once.
- Ask for the same reconciliation on a single high-traffic day to isolate the effect.

---

From the QuQi prompt library - https://www.quqi.io/prompts/metric-definition-reconciliation