Product1 publisher3 min readPublished
A CEO's $25-a-day agent filled the one gap in its data with a confident guess
Writing in Fast Company, a non-technical CEO prices a day of his homemade agent at no more than $25 in tokens against work he sizes at half a chief of staff's load, then describes the customer call he nearly walked into with the wrong numbers.
The Product Desk · Product desk

What happened
- A CEO writing in Fast Company says that after two decades on the business side of startups without coding, he built his own agent on Claude Code following almost a year of using Claude.
- He estimates that within the first week it was handling roughly half a full-time chief of staff's workload, including meeting prep, gathering company updates and drafting strategy memos.
- Months on, he uses it daily at no more than $25 a day in tokens, which he puts at less than 5% of what a full-time hire would cost.
- Ahead of a customer call it returned an account summary that looked complete and sounded certain but was wrong, and he says he nearly walked in with the wrong picture of the account.
- His stated lesson is that agents rarely announce what they are missing: when a data source goes down or a permission expires the agent keeps answering, and he calls a confident wrong answer more dangerous than a visible error.
Compiled by The Product DeskSomething wrong?How this is made
Why it matters
- constraint Connection coverage, not model quality, sets the ceiling here: any source of truth left off the list becomes a hole the agent fills in the same confident voice it uses for the parts it can see.
- exposure The certainty transfers to whoever carries the summary into the room and has to answer for the number, which in this case was the CEO himself and could as easily be an account manager working from a skill someone else wrote.
- cost The account says getting there took quite a bit of iteration, though it never says how many of the CEO's own hours went into that iteration. The token line has a number; the build does not. Anyone budgeting from the $25 figure is working from half a ledger.
The summary depended on six sources and five of them were connected. Slack, support tickets, product telemetry, CRM notes and email were all wired in [7]; the customer's revenue number, the figure that would decide how the call went, sat in a spreadsheet that was not [8][4]. An agent short one of six inputs hands back a whole answer rather than five-sixths of one with a labelled hole, delivered in the same register as the answers that happen to be right [8], and the author says he nearly took that into the meeting [9].
A day of the agent runs no more than $25 in tokens, which he calls less than 5% of a full-time hire [5][6], so the hire he is comparing against costs upward of $500 for the same day [1], or roughly $125,000 a year against $6,250 in tokens if you annualize both over 250 business days [2]. Set that beside his other figure, roughly half a chief of staff's workload in the first week [4], and the work absorbed came in under a tenth per unit of the human cost [3].
What is described here is narrower than headcount substitution: a read layer across systems the company already pays for. He used to work out of a bookmarks bar full of SaaS dashboards, and the agent goes to the data instead, pulling one narrative out of CRM, support queue, telemetry, Slack, internal docs and meeting notes [12][13]. What the piece reports is replacing the functions of a chief of staff, not a role left unfilled or a person let go [16]. His half-a-workload number describes week one [4]; the months-later passage gives the daily habit and the token cost [5].
For any recurring answer, two axes sort what to hand over next. Either every source it depends on is connected or at least one lives off-system. And either the output stays inside the team or it goes to a customer. Internal prep with full coverage is the safe corner to start in. That account summary sat in the opposite one, partial coverage and an external audience, where a guess becomes something said out loud to a paying customer. What he added is an ordering: a Model Context Protocol health check runs first in each session and names the missing sources before the agent says anything about what it knows [11]. His two-founders comparison argues the same from the other direction, since the identical question about roadmap progress gets a better answer from a quarterly goals doc, a Jira connection, standup notes and access to the engineering Slack channel rather than from a better model [15].
On his own numbers the tokens are the cheap input; the expensive one is the inventory of sources behind each recurring question, and whether the agent reads that list back before it starts talking.
What to watch
- A version of this comparison signed off by a finance team, with token spend and the salary line sitting in the same budget.
- A case where the silent gap reaches the customer or the board rather than getting caught during prep.
- Claude Code shipping a coverage check as a default instead of leaving each user to build one as a skill.