SaaS Replacement Planner
Evaluate a company's SaaS stack and produce a rigorous, actionable plan that quantifies the ROI of migrating from subscription software to AI-agent-powered alternatives. Bias toward replacement where the economics support it, but stay honest: not every tool can be replaced today.
Contents
references/analysis-framework.md -- the six-step per-tool analysis (classification, feasibility tiers, build-cost formulas, Claude+MCP architecture, risk scoring, priority matrix)references/output-template.md -- full saas-replacement-plan.md document structurereferences/patterns.md -- proven replacement patterns by category and edge-case handlingreferences/analysis-guidelines.md -- estimation rigor, honesty rules, OneWave AI thesis, and output quality standards
Workflow
- Gather input. Collect the SaaS tool list. Parse screenshots, CSVs, or bank statements; organize informal lists into a structured format (tool, monthly/annual cost, seats, primary use case). Ask clarifying questions only when critical data is missing: seat counts, primary workflows, integration dependencies, mission-critical vs nice-to-have, and compliance requirements.
- Research current pricing. For each tool, verify pricing with WebSearch when numbers are missing or look off. Check per-seat pricing, outdated plans, API access for the replacement, and data export capability.
- Analyze each tool. Run the complete six-step framework in
references/analysis-framework.md for every tool. Do not skip tools or give superficial analysis. Apply matching patterns from references/patterns.md.
- Build the priority matrix. Plot all tools on the Impact vs Effort axes. Sequence replacements and group tools that share infrastructure (e.g., all needing Supabase) to reduce incremental build cost.
- Generate the timeline. Create a realistic timeline accounting for engineering capacity, parallel running periods, dependencies between replacements, and quick wins that fund later investments.
- Write the plan. Generate
saas-replacement-plan.md in the current working directory using the structure in references/output-template.md. Follow the rigor and quality standards in references/analysis-guidelines.md.
- Present key findings. After writing the file, summarize total potential savings, the top 3 quick wins, any surprising findings, and the recommended first action.
Core Principle
Every SaaS subscription is a recurring tax on the business; every agent replacement is an investment in owned infrastructure that compounds over time. Make the numbers speak clearly and let the ROI make the argument. See references/analysis-guidelines.md for the full OneWave AI thesis and how to frame the analysis.
1---2name: saas-replacement-planner3description: Evaluates which SaaS tools can be replaced with AI agents. Takes a list of current SaaS subscriptions with costs, assesses replacement feasibility, estimates build vs buy economics, identifies Claude+MCP alternatives, and generates a comprehensive replacement plan with priority matrix, ROI analysis, implementation timeline, and risk assessment.4---56# SaaS Replacement Planner78Evaluate a company's SaaS stack and produce a rigorous, actionable plan that quantifies the ROI of migrating from subscription software to AI-agent-powered alternatives. Bias toward replacement where the economics support it, but stay honest: not every tool can be replaced today.910## Contents1112- `references/analysis-framework.md` -- the six-step per-tool analysis (classification, feasibility tiers, build-cost formulas, Claude+MCP architecture, risk scoring, priority matrix)13- `references/output-template.md` -- full `saas-replacement-plan.md` document structure14- `references/patterns.md` -- proven replacement patterns by category and edge-case handling15- `references/analysis-guidelines.md` -- estimation rigor, honesty rules, OneWave AI thesis, and output quality standards1617## Workflow18191. **Gather input.** Collect the SaaS tool list. Parse screenshots, CSVs, or bank statements; organize informal lists into a structured format (tool, monthly/annual cost, seats, primary use case). Ask clarifying questions only when critical data is missing: seat counts, primary workflows, integration dependencies, mission-critical vs nice-to-have, and compliance requirements.202. **Research current pricing.** For each tool, verify pricing with WebSearch when numbers are missing or look off. Check per-seat pricing, outdated plans, API access for the replacement, and data export capability.213. **Analyze each tool.** Run the complete six-step framework in `references/analysis-framework.md` for every tool. Do not skip tools or give superficial analysis. Apply matching patterns from `references/patterns.md`.224. **Build the priority matrix.** Plot all tools on the Impact vs Effort axes. Sequence replacements and group tools that share infrastructure (e.g., all needing Supabase) to reduce incremental build cost.235. **Generate the timeline.** Create a realistic timeline accounting for engineering capacity, parallel running periods, dependencies between replacements, and quick wins that fund later investments.246. **Write the plan.** Generate `saas-replacement-plan.md` in the current working directory using the structure in `references/output-template.md`. Follow the rigor and quality standards in `references/analysis-guidelines.md`.257. **Present key findings.** After writing the file, summarize total potential savings, the top 3 quick wins, any surprising findings, and the recommended first action.2627## Core Principle2829Every SaaS subscription is a recurring tax on the business; every agent replacement is an investment in owned infrastructure that compounds over time. Make the numbers speak clearly and let the ROI make the argument. See `references/analysis-guidelines.md` for the full OneWave AI thesis and how to frame the analysis.
gked2121