I tested Granola across twelve user interviews. It filled gaps without turning every meeting into a wall of transcript text.
The limitation is search across a large research archive. I would still move lasting insights into a dedicated research repository.
Editor’s noteA useful tool review should make the task, time, and limitations explicit.
What this test actually tells us
First-draft speed only tells you whether a tool can start. The second revision, mobile behavior, empty states, and long-term maintenance decide whether it belongs in a real workflow.
This kind of same-brief test is genuinely useful. I would also track the time needed for a second revision, because a fast first draft does not always save time overall.
That matches my experience. The meaningful difference usually appears in responsive behavior and data states, not the first screen.