Enter your numbers
Use real observations from your own work, even rough ones; the toolkit's incident log is built for gathering exactly these. If you have to estimate, estimate conservatively in the tool's favor — a net-negative result from generous assumptions is far harder to argue with.
Reading the result honestly
The model counts four things: the drafting time the tool removes, the review time it adds, the expected cost of errors that slip through, and the subscription itself — the visible cost that, as the guide's fourth risk category notes, is only the start of the ledger. A net-positive number doesn't end the conversation; it means the tool survives the economics and the discussion can move to the other risk categories — confidentiality, liability, client expectations. A net-negative number is your headline: lead the memo with it, show your inputs, and invite the manager to challenge the assumptions. Inputs they adjust themselves become numbers they believe.
Two cautions. First, the slipped-error rate is the input people most want to set to zero; the incidents library exists to show why that's not realistic even with diligent professionals reviewing. Second, this calculator measures one workflow, not the tool in general. A tool can be net-positive for internal brainstorming and net-negative for client deliverables at the same desk, which is exactly the argument for scoped use rather than blanket adoption.