Skip to content
Claude for Operators

SaaS Replacement & Tool Audit

Last verified: 14 February 2026 | Applies to: All plans

In 30 seconds

Section titled “In 30 seconds”

Most businesses are paying for 15-40 SaaS tools, and at least a few of them could be replaced — fully or partially — by Claude. But “could be replaced” is different from “should be replaced.” This workflow gives you a systematic process for auditing your tool stack, scoring each tool’s replaceability, calculating true savings (not just the subscription line), and making the switch without disrupting your team.

What it does

Section titled “What it does”

This is a structured audit process, not a sales pitch for replacing everything with Claude. The goal is honest assessment:

  • Full replacement — the SaaS tool can be completely cancelled
  • Partial replacement — Claude handles 50-80% of the use case, reducing your tier or seats
  • Keep — the SaaS tool does something Claude genuinely can’t, or the switching cost outweighs the savings
  • Consolidate — two or more tools can be replaced by a single Claude workflow

The audit produces a prioritised action plan: which tools to replace first, which to evaluate over 30 days, and which to keep.

How to set it up

Section titled “How to set it up”

  1. Build your tool inventory

    Section titled “Build your tool inventory”

    Start by listing everything your business pays for. Most operators undercount by 30-40%. Use this prompt to be thorough:

    Help me build a complete SaaS tool inventory. I'll list what I can remember, and then you'll prompt me with categories I might have missed.
    

    Here's what I know we pay for:
    [paste your list — even a rough one is fine]
    

    After I've listed everything, organise them into categories:
    - Communication & collaboration
    - Project management
    - Finance & accounting
    - Sales & CRM
    - Marketing
    - HR & people
    - Support & customer success
    - Analytics & BI
    - Development & IT
    - Security & compliance
    - Content & design
    - Other/miscellaneous
    

    For each tool, note: name, monthly cost, number of seats/users, primary use case, who relies on it most.

    Claude will prompt you with common categories you may have missed. Most operators discover 3-5 tools they’d forgotten about during this exercise.

  2. Score each tool for replaceability

    Section titled “Score each tool for replaceability”

    Once you have the inventory, assess each tool:

    For each tool in my inventory, score its replaceability by Claude on a 1-5 scale:
    

    5 = Full replacement — Claude + plugins can do everything this tool does
    4 = Mostly replaceable — Claude handles 80%+, minor gaps
    3 = Partially replaceable — Claude handles the core use case, but we lose some features
    2 = Supplementary — Claude can help with parts, but the tool is still needed
    1 = Not replaceable — the tool does something Claude fundamentally can't
    

    For each score, explain:
    - What Claude can handle (and which plugin or feature)
    - What Claude can't handle (and why it matters)
    - Any dependencies (other tools that integrate with this one)
    

    Be honest. Don't oversell Claude's capabilities.

    The “be honest” instruction matters. Without it, Claude tends to be optimistic about its own capabilities. You want a realistic assessment.

  3. Calculate true savings

    Section titled “Calculate true savings”

    Subscription cost is only part of the equation. For each tool scored 3 or above, calculate the full picture:

    For each tool I could potentially replace with Claude, calculate the true cost comparison:
    

    Current cost:
    - Monthly subscription
    - Per-seat costs (number of users x per-seat price)
    - Annual contract commitments (any lock-in or cancellation fees?)
    - Integration costs (do we pay for API access or middleware?)
    - Admin time (hours/month spent managing this tool)
    

    Switching cost:
    - Time to set up the Claude equivalent (hours x internal hourly rate)
    - Training time for affected team members
    - Data migration effort (do we need to export historical data?)
    - Risk of disruption during transition
    - Any lost functionality we'd need to work around
    

    Net savings:
    - Monthly savings after switching
    - Break-even point (when does the switching cost pay for itself?)
    - Annual savings after break-even
    

    Present as a table with a clear recommendation: Replace, Evaluate (30-day trial), or Keep.

  4. Prioritise your replacement plan

    Section titled “Prioritise your replacement plan”

    Not everything should be replaced at once. Ask Claude to sequence the plan:

    Based on the analysis, create a prioritised replacement plan:
    

    Phase 1 (This month) — Quick wins: tools that are easy to replace, low risk, clear savings
    Phase 2 (Next month) — Evaluate: tools worth a 30-day parallel trial
    Phase 3 (Quarter) — Bigger switches: tools that need more preparation or team buy-in
    Keep list — tools we should not replace, with a one-line reason for each
    

    For each phase, include:
    - Which tool to replace
    - What Claude feature/plugin replaces it
    - Who's affected
    - Steps to switch
    - Expected monthly savings

  5. Run parallel trials

    Section titled “Run parallel trials”

    For Phase 2 tools, run Claude alongside the existing tool for 30 days:

    Set up a 30-day evaluation for [tool name]. Create a tracking framework:
    

    Week 1-2: Use both tools for the same tasks. Log time spent on each, output quality, and any gaps.
    Week 3-4: Primary use Claude, fall back to the tool only when needed. Track how often you fall back and why.
    

    Evaluation criteria:
    - Output quality (1-5 compared to the current tool)
    - Time efficiency (faster, same, slower?)
    - Feature gaps (what's missing that matters?)
    - Team adoption (did people actually use it, or revert?)
    - Cost comparison (actual usage vs. subscription)

How operators actually use it

Section titled “How operators actually use it”

The scenario: A 12-person agency spending $4,200/month across 18 SaaS tools.

Audit results:

ToolMonthly costScoreRecommendation
Jasper (content)$5905Replace with Marketing plugin
Otter.ai (transcription)$2004Replace — Claude handles meeting notes
Notion (wiki)$2403Evaluate — basic docs yes, database features no
Toggl (time tracking)$1802Keep — Claude can’t track time in real-time
Figma (design)$4501Keep — not a Claude use case
Grammarly (writing)$3004Replace — Claude handles editing well, though you lose inline browser checking

Outcome: Replaced Jasper immediately, evaluated Otter.ai, Grammarly, and Notion over 30 days (replaced Otter.ai and Grammarly, kept Notion). Net savings: $1,090/month ($13,080/year). Additional Claude cost: $200/month (two Pro seats specifically for replacing these tools). True annual savings: $10,680.
Section titled “Related”

Something wrong or outdated? Let us know →

Get weekly workflows — subscribe to the newsletter.