Do not compare feature lists. Compare how a tool behaves when a date changes, signal drops on site, and a customer asks what stage the job is at.
List three situations from the last month that cost you time: a rescheduled install, lost handover photos, a customer left without an update. Judge any system by whether those three would have gone differently.
Check whether a job splits into stages with their own status and owner. Without that you get a task list that says nothing about installation progress.
Photos and notes should belong to the stage. If they go to a separate gallery or drive, nobody finds them six months later.
Ask how a customer confirms a stage. An email with an attachment is not a handover, because it leaves no record on the job.
Signal is poor in plant rooms and on roofs. Check whether crews can save progress locally and sync once the connection returns.
Owner, coordinator, and crew need different views. One shared login for everything ends in accidental changes.
Ask how long the first project takes to set up and whether you can export your data if you change your mind.
You should be able to run the first real job within days. If the start requires weeks of configuration, the tool probably was not built for installation work.
A general tool can be configured for installation work, but you design and maintain that process yourself. Industry software ships with stages, documentation, and handovers.
Ask to walk through one of your own jobs, not a sample one. Rescheduling and stage sign-off reveal the most.
Yes, if it lets you run a real project from start to handover. Then you are testing the process, not the screens.
Include a coordinator and one installer in the evaluation. A tool crews will not open on site changes nothing in the office.