# fn-69-evaluate-gemma-4-e2b-it-for-compact.4 Publish the outcome and any follow-up path

## Description

Close the loop once benchmark and runtime-fit evidence exist.

Start here:

- `README.md`
- `docs/CONFIGURATION.md`
- `docs/CLI.md`
- `website/features/benchmarks.md`
- `research/embeddings/README.md`

Requirements:

- publish the benchmark outcome clearly
- do not overstate the result
- if Gemma is only good as a custom/remote option, say that plainly
- if Gemma looks like a real preset/default candidate, point to the follow-up
  implementation epic rather than silently changing defaults here

Possible outcomes:

1. no change
2. optional Gemma guide/recommendation only
3. follow-up epic for preset/default adoption

## Acceptance

- [ ] Docs state clearly whether Gemma 4 E2B-it is a no-go, optional model, or shipped-preset candidate.
- [ ] Recommendation is consistent across README, config docs, and benchmark pages.
- [ ] Any suggested model change is explicitly deferred to a follow-up implementation epic unless already approved.

## Done summary

TBD

## Evidence

- Commits:
- Tests:
- PRs:
