Workflow prioritiser: who it is for
The prioritiser compares candidate tasks on how often they recur, how long each run takes, how structured the inputs already are, and what a wrong output would cost. It produces an order, so the first project is the one most likely to work rather than the one that sounds most impressive.
( The Detail )
What this tool tells you
A high ranking means a task is a reasonable candidate, not that it is guaranteed to succeed. It does not estimate build effort, judge whether your team will adopt it, or account for a supplier or system that will not cooperate. Those constraints come from whoever knows the operation.
Using it well
This is aimed at owners and operators who already suspect there is a better way to run a recurring part of the business, but do not yet have language for what is actually wrong. It assumes no technical background and no existing AI work.
It is less useful if you have already scoped a specific build and know the data sources, the rules and the owner. At that point the constraint is delivery rather than diagnosis, and a direct conversation will get you further than a structured questionnaire.
How to approach it
Begin with the decision rather than the tool. Name the recurring judgement this affects, the information it depends on, and the person accountable for acting on the result. That framing keeps the first build small enough to inspect and useful enough to matter.
Keep a human review point in the loop until the quality and the failure modes are understood. A system that shows its working - what it drew on, where it is uncertain, and what it deliberately left alone - is one a business can keep running after the initial build.
( Next Step )
Start small enough to review, but on a workflow important enough to show whether a better system is worth building.