Someone misrepresented my work in a published paper Its a conference paper that broadly says:

"There is X, Y, Z, Biguri et al, articles out there, but here is a table with each of the works and their limitations, and why ours is better"

And then lists a bunch of things on my published article (about a software tool) claiming it does not contain several features. The problem is, the tool has and always had most of the features they say it hasn't. They are published and clearly demoed and showcased in the webpage. 

Their paper has some credit, it is still good work and its not invalid because of their mistakes. But it is seriously misrepresenting my work.

What should one do in this case? 

I was thinking on politely emailing them to let them know about their mistakes, I assume its not a malicious mistake, but more the fact that they did not take the time to properly do research. Is there anything else I can/should do?
While nothing much may come of it, I think you should write them pointing out that they have missed some things about your work. Ask them for a correction, though don't expect one to occur. If you want to smooth the waters, congratulate them, also, for the good things they have done in their own work. 

But letting it lie without comment serves no one well and might lead to a repeat in the future. 

If you want to be a bit more aggressive, copy the conference chair on your email, but think hard about the consequences of that. 

I'll assume that the errors were unintentional, in which case you should expect a good result.