AI tools have become a regular part of my daily workflow, but I’ve noticed a small problem that keeps popping up: it’s worth saving some pointers. I reuse certain prompts for data analysis, research, formatting, brainstorming, and internal work tools. Digging through old conversations to find them isn’t exactly efficient. So I decided to build something that I would actually use: a simple Chrome extension to save, organize and reuse notifications from the browser.
I kept the test simple and consistent
I gave it to make the comparison fair ChatGPT, Claude and Gemini are the same project short and judged them against the same expectations. The extension had to use Chrome’s Manifest V3 format, rely only on HTML, CSS, JavaScript, and local browser memory, and work without an account, server, or Chrome Web Store release. At the very least, he should have saved hints with titles, displayed them in a popup, moved them to the clipboard, edited the saved hints, and deleted the ones he no longer needed. I focused on more than just the code running. I looked at how useful the first answer was, how well each tool guides a beginner, how complete the files are, how it handles rough edges, and whether I feel confident following its instructions.
During testing, I used the highest free version available on each platform: ChatGPT’s Free tier GPT-5.5, Claude Sonnet 4.6, and Gemini 3.5 Flash. Since I wasn’t paying for all three services, this seemed like the fairest way to compare what a typical reader might try for themselves.
The two instructions I use for each platform are listed at the end of the article.
It was immediately useful, but not completely polished
ChatGPT was fast turning an idea into something useful. It did a good job of explaining the overall process, laying out the basic documentation I needed, and getting me from operational to working prototype in about five minutes. The upgrade was simple, but it worked: I could save hints, view them in a pop-up window, move them to the clipboard, and delete the ones I no longer needed.
The main thing I wanted more was a technical explanation. ChatGPT told me what to do, but could have gone a little deeper what each piece of code actually did. This is important if you are new to creating extensions and want to understand the project instead of copying files into a folder. I’d also like the extension to insert a saved query directly into the active text field instead of me manually copying and pasting it. To be fair, ChatGPT has offered this as a future upgrade, along with a few smart improvements for security and usability. Overall, ChatGPT made a strong first impression as I got a quick business extension and a clear way to make it better.
Gemini made the project easy to follow
It was better to explain the project than to improve it
Gemini was fast and I liked the way it presented the code. The color-coded snippets made the answer feel more like working inside a real code editor, making it easy to scan through the various files and understand where everything belongs. Extension also did its part. I could save, view, copy and delete hints from the popup.
Where the twins excelled was in how they explained the structure of the project. It did a little better job walking through the directory layout and explaining what each piece of code actually does. It also provided clear, layman-friendly instructions for downloading an unpackaged extension to Chrome, a helpful detail if you’ve never created a Chrome extension before. Like ChatGPT, it didn’t enter a saved command directly into the selected text field, so the workflow still depended on manual copy and paste.
Gemini’s upgrade suggestions were solid, and he did a good job explaining the what, why, and how behind each upgrade. I just thought ChatGPT had better recommendations overall. Gemini made the project easy to understand, but I’d like to see more ambitious ideas to make the extension even better. For example, it didn’t go far in security improvements or suggest that a saved query be entered directly into the active text field.
Claude gave me the best extension but explained the least
Even if the process was harder to follow, it felt more finished
Claude was the slowest of the three platforms, but it also took a different approach. Instead of just giving me the code to copy into separate files, Claude packaged the project and gave me the extension files in a ZIP file. This made the handover feel more complete, but it also meant less step-by-step explanation of the file structure than I’ve gotten from other tools.
Clod’s extension included the basic operational saving features I wanted, but also went a step further with useful additions like search and tags. The trade-off was that Claude gave me the least amount of explaining along the way. This made for a most capable extension, but I had to rely more on the results than on understanding it.
When I asked about upgrades, Claude came back with a long list of possible upgrades and did a fair job of explaining why they were important. This helped to fix some lighter setup explanations, but the general pattern remained the same: Claude was better at giving me a polished result than teaching me how the project worked.
Claude created an extension that I really want to use
He won not because he explained the problem in the best way, but because he solved the problem
Claude was my winner because the task wasn’t just to explain how a Chrome extension works. This was to create the first usable version of an operational saving tool, and Claude came closest to this goal. ChatGPT was easier to follow as a starter, and Gemini made the project feel organized and polished, but Claude delivered the most useful program after the test was over.
The biggest difference was that Claude thought outside the box. Its enhancements included search, labels, better operational organization, helpful pop-up messages, a cleaner interface, and a dark mode color scheme that made it feel more like a real tool than a throwaway demo. These details become important after storing more than a few instructions, because the challenge is to find, sort, move and manage them quickly. The Claude version still needs some refinement, including better storage management, stronger accessibility around the delete confirmation window, and the way queries are exported and imported. But it made the best app, not the clearest tutorial, and the only one that started to feel like a practical tool instead of a basic coding exercise.
-
- What is included?
-
Unlimited chats, faster response speed, priority access and more
- Brand
-
ChatGPT
ChatGPT’s AI-powered assistance gets even better with a paid subscription; o Plus level offers unlimited chats, faster response speed, priority access and more. offers enhanced features including
-
Google Gemini is a multimodal artificial intelligence models and integrated assistant developed by Google. It understands and combines text, images, audio, video and code. As an AI assistant, it helps Google Workspace apps (Docs, Gmail) and integrated writing, planning, learning and productivity on mobile devices.
The best AI tool depends on what you need it for
This test reminded me that “best” depends on the job. ChatGPT was the easiest to follow, Gemini did the best job making the project feel organized, and Claude delivered the strongest finished prototype. This is important because AI coding tools don’t just compete on whether they can generate code. They compete on how well they understand the problem you’re trying to solve. For this project, Claude came the closest to creating something I would use, but the bigger takeaway is that these tools are better when you know how to judge the output instead of just accepting the first answer that works.
The first command I use on each platform is:
I want to build a beginner-friendly Chrome browser extension using Manifest V3. The extension should let me save, view, copy, edit, and delete reusable AI prompts for browser-based AI tools like ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude.
Please create the full project using plain HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. It should store prompts locally in the browser, not on a server. Include all required files, including manifest.json, popup.html, popup.css, and popup.js. Explain where each file goes and how I can load the unpacked extension in Chrome for testing. Assume I have never built a browser extension before.I also used a follow-up command that allows each platform to make some changes or edits.
Now review this as if it were a small real-world browser extension project. What would you improve before using it regularly? Focus on code organization, maintainability, user experience, permissions, privacy, and future features. Then recommend the next three changes I should make.
