Most AI tool review sites drown you in criteria. Weighted scores, feature matrices, "best for" tables that somehow award every tool an 8.2 out of 10. GoodGoodBad takes the opposite approach: two good things, one bad thing. That's the whole format.
The site, available at goodgoodbad.com, covers AI productivity tools with a deliberately constrained review structure. Every entry follows the same pattern - two specific things the tool does well, one specific thing it doesn't. No composite scores, no "overall verdict", no padding. The format forces the reviewer to commit to concrete observations instead of hedging behind numbers.
There's a real editorial discipline behind this kind of constraint. When you have to name exactly what's wrong with a tool, you can't soften it with a 7.8/10 that technically communicates nothing. The one-flaw format also implicitly signals priority - the thing listed isn't just a minor quirk, it's the most important criticism worth flagging.
The catalog looks thin at launch, which is normal for a new publication. What's less common is a review format this resistant to the usual pressures that make AI tool coverage feel compromised. Worth bookmarking as the site builds out its coverage.