Should you use AI for this task?

Get a deterministic recommendation for the right solution pattern, safe autonomy, required controls, and a minimum viable pilot in one short guided check.

Before you begin

  • Do not enter task text, names, records, or confidential details.
  • Choose categories based on the real workflow you intend to use.
  • Value cannot override a safety, policy, or review requirement.

This educational check is based on methodology version task-fit-1.0.2. It runs locally and does not use a generative model.

Private by design. Calculation and saved progress stay in this browser. Answers are not sent to us.

Step 1 of 5Not saved yet

Step 1

Define the task boundary

Describe the kind of work without entering task text, names, records, or confidential details.

This selects relevant examples; it does not change a safety gate by itself.

Choose the outcome, not a product or model.

How often will this work happen?

Recurring work may justify a more repeatable workflow.

What is the expected volume?

Estimate the normal workload, not a launch spike. If the volume is not known yet, choose the lower band until it is measured.

How much benefit could a good workflow provide?

Estimate realistic benefit after review and control effort. If evidence is weak, choose the lower band. Value never overrides a safety or policy gate.

Could stable, deterministic rules solve the task?

Ordinary software is preferable when fixed rules are sufficient. Choose “Not sure” instead of assuming AI is needed.

Step 2

Set data and evidence needs

These answers determine whether supplied context is enough and whether approved environments, retrieval, or citations are required.

What is the most sensitive data involved?

Use your organization’s classification. If you are between levels, choose the more restrictive one and confirm it before use. Do not enter task content.

Does the result depend on current information?

Current information may require retrieval and source checking.

Must material claims be traceable to sources?

Required traceability activates citation controls.

Is the supplied context sufficient for the task?

Choose “No” when important source material is missing, or “Not sure” when completeness has not been confirmed.

Step 3

Consider impact and review

Use the most serious credible consequence. High-impact work requires a reviewer who can genuinely challenge and stop the output.

What could happen if the output is materially wrong?

Choose the highest credible consequence, not the most likely one. If you are between levels, use the higher level until a responsible reviewer confirms otherwise.

How can a person verify the result?

Approval alone is not verification.

Is this regulated or otherwise high-impact work?

Examples include consequential decisions, regulated records, or formal professional responsibility. If you are unsure, answer “Yes” until the boundary is confirmed.

Does either specific product boundary apply?

These boundaries prevent AI influence for the named task. “Neither applies” only means neither named boundary was identified; it is not legal, compliance, policy, or organizational approval.

Is an audit trail required?

Auditability requires traceable evidence and workflow records. If the requirement is unclear, treat it as required until the responsible owner confirms otherwise.

Step 4

Set autonomy and action controls

The check may lower the requested autonomy. Irreversible action cannot receive an autonomous recommendation.

What is the intended maximum autonomy?

The result may impose a lower ceiling.

Step 5

Review before calculation

This is educational decision support, not legal, safety, compliance, or professional certification. The deterministic calculation happens locally after you confirm.

What will happen

Your categorical answers are evaluated in this browser. Nothing is uploaded. A share link is created only if you explicitly request one; it places the same categorical state in the URL fragment.

Want to inspect the logic first? See owner-reviewed example results, Read the methodology overview or review the corrections process.