Cost Analysis Reference — Void
Purpose: Use this file to score keeping cost, score removal risk, and translate those numbers into a recommendation.
Contents:
Cost-of-Keeping Score (0-10)formula and rubricRemoval Risk Score (0-10)formula and dimensionsCoK x Removal Riskdecision matrix- Reusable score-calculation template
Cost-of-Keeping Score (0-10)
Formula
CoK Score = Σ (Dimension Score x Weight)
Dimensions:
1. Upkeep (0.25)
2. Verification (0.20)
3. Cognitive Load (0.25)
4. Entanglement (0.15)
5. Replaceability (0.15)5 Dimensions
1. Upkeep (25%)
Frequency and cost of ongoing maintenance.
| Score | Label | Criteria |
|---|---|---|
0-2 |
Stable |
0-1 fixes or updates in the last 12 months |
3-4 |
Low |
2-3 minor maintenance events per year |
5-6 |
Moderate |
Roughly monthly maintenance |
7-8 |
High |
Weekly maintenance or repeated breakage |
9-10 |
Critical |
Constant upkeep or fragile by default |
Evidence by domain:
- Code: bug frequency, ticket volume, on-call incidents
- Process: procedure changes, exception rate
- Document: staleness rate, review cycle
- Dependency: patch frequency, breaking-change frequency
2. Verification (20%)
Cost of proving it still works correctly.
| Score | Label | Criteria |
|---|---|---|
0-2 |
Simple |
Fast and straightforward to verify |
3-4 |
Moderate |
Stable verification exists with some setup |
5-6 |
Complex |
Verification needs significant setup or external dependency |
7-8 |
Fragile |
Verification is noisy or inconsistent |
9-10 |
Unverifiable |
No reliable verification path |
Evidence by domain:
- Code: test runtime, flakiness, setup complexity
- Process: compliance or quality-check effort
- Document: reference-check effort and consistency burden
- Configuration: impact-testing difficulty
3. Cognitive Load (25%)
Understanding and operating cost.
| Score | Label | Criteria |
|---|---|---|
0-2 |
Self-evident |
Immediate understanding |
3-4 |
Clear |
Some domain context needed |
5-6 |
Contextual |
Hidden assumptions and cross-context knowledge |
7-8 |
Complex |
Requires deep institutional knowledge |
9-10 |
Opaque |
Hard even for maintainers to explain |
Evidence by domain:
- Code: review time, onboarding friction
- Process: rule memorization, exception handling
- Document: contradictions, discoverability issues, terminology drift
- Design: user confusion, support volume
4. Entanglement (15%)
Coupling and blast radius complexity.
| Score | Label | Criteria |
|---|---|---|
0-2 |
Isolated |
No meaningful downstream effect |
3-4 |
Loosely coupled |
Few clear interfaces |
5-6 |
Moderately coupled |
Multiple dependencies |
7-8 |
Tightly coupled |
Wide impact when changed |
9-10 |
Entangled |
Separation is difficult and side effects are hard to predict |
Evidence by domain:
- Code: dependency graph, change coupling
- Process: bottleneck frequency, process dependency chain
- Document: update cascades, reference sprawl
- Configuration: hidden option interactions
5. Replaceability (15%)
Inverse replaceability: higher score means harder to replace.
| Score | Label | Criteria |
|---|---|---|
0-2 |
Trivially replaceable |
Standard replacement exists immediately |
3-4 |
Easily replaceable |
Low migration cost |
5-6 |
Replaceable with effort |
Days to a week of migration work |
7-8 |
Difficult to replace |
Requires custom work over weeks |
9-10 |
Irreplaceable |
No viable substitute without months of effort |
Evidence by domain:
- Code: library or implementation alternatives
- Process: alternative workflow or automation path
- Document: alternative source of truth
- Dependency: substitute maturity
Score Interpretation
| CoK Score | Label | Recommendation |
|---|---|---|
0.0-2.0 |
Low cost |
KEEP |
2.1-4.0 |
Moderate |
KEEP-WITH-WARNING |
4.1-6.0 |
Elevated |
SIMPLIFY candidate |
6.1-8.0 |
High |
strong REMOVE or SIMPLIFY candidate |
8.1-10.0 |
Critical |
highest-priority REMOVE candidate |
Removal Risk Score (0-10)
Formula
Removal Risk = Σ (Risk Dimension x Weight)
Dimensions:
1. User Impact (0.30)
2. Data Integrity (0.25)
3. System Stability (0.25)
4. Reversibility (0.20)Risk Dimensions
| Dimension | 0 low risk |
5 medium |
10 high risk |
|---|---|---|---|
User Impact |
No users | Small internal group | Broad external audience |
Data Integrity |
No data effect | Manageable migration | Data-loss risk |
System Stability |
No stability effect | Partial impact | Outage or major instability |
Reversibility |
Immediate rollback | Hours to recover | Recovery is difficult or impossible |
Decision Matrix: CoK x Removal Risk
Removal Risk
Low(0-3) Med(4-6) High(7-10)
CoK High(7-10) REMOVE SIMPLIFY DEFER+PLAN
CoK Med(4-6) SIMPLIFY DEFER KEEP-WITH-WARNING
CoK Low(0-3) KEEP KEEP KEEPScore Calculation Template
cost_of_keeping:
target: "<Target Name>"
domain: "<DOMAIN>"
dimensions:
upkeep: { score: X, evidence: "string", weight: 0.25 }
verification: { score: X, evidence: "string", weight: 0.20 }
cognitive_load: { score: X, evidence: "string", weight: 0.25 }
entanglement: { score: X, evidence: "string", weight: 0.15 }
replaceability: { score: X, evidence: "string", weight: 0.15 }
total_score: "X.X"
label: "LOW | MODERATE | ELEVATED | HIGH | CRITICAL"
removal_risk:
dimensions:
user_impact: { score: X, evidence: "string", weight: 0.30 }
data_integrity: { score: X, evidence: "string", weight: 0.25 }
system_stability: { score: X, evidence: "string", weight: 0.25 }
reversibility: { score: X, evidence: "string", weight: 0.20 }
total_score: "X.X"
decision_matrix_result: "REMOVE | SIMPLIFY | DEFER | KEEP-WITH-WARNING | KEEP"
confidence: "X%"
next_phase: "-> SUBTRACT"