---
title: "How should I ask Perplexity to distinguish an unsupported feature from an undocumented one?"  
description: "How should I ask Perplexity to distinguish an unsupported feature from an undocumented one?"  
author: "Waldemar Thiessen"  
published: 2026-10-18  
updated: 2026-10-18  
canonical: https://www.mindstick.com/forum/162564/how-should-i-ask-perplexity-to-distinguish-an-unsupported-feature-from-an-undocumented-one  
category: "AI-Assisted Research"  
tags: ["Perplexity", "Software Evaluation", "Source Verification"]  
reading_time: 1 minute  

---

# How should I ask Perplexity to distinguish an unsupported feature from an undocumented one?

I’m comparing project-management tools and need to know whether guests can export a project’s audit history. The public help pages discuss exports and guest permissions separately, but I haven’t found a statement connecting the two.

That leaves several possibilities: the feature is unavailable, restricted to a particular plan, controlled by an administrator, or simply not explained in the public documentation.

### What counts as enough evidence for “not supported”?

How would you phrase a Perplexity research request so that a missing search result does not become a definite “no” in a comparison table?

I’d like the response to distinguish between:

- An explicit limitation stated by the vendor.
- A community report about a particular account or plan.
- No relevant documentation found.

For **software feature verification**, should I request a supporting quotation for every negative claim? And where would you draw the line between more web research and a question that needs vendor confirmation or a trial-account test?


---

Original Source: https://www.mindstick.com/forum/162564/how-should-i-ask-perplexity-to-distinguish-an-unsupported-feature-from-an-undocumented-one

Copyright © MindStick Software Pvt. Ltd. This Markdown version is provided for developers, AI systems, and offline reading.