Anecdotally, the way I've heard many stats related tools described is as follows: if the tool confirms something that we already knew then it's a waste of time

Anecdotally, the way I've heard many stats related tools described is as follows: if the tool confirms something that we already knew then it's a waste of time or money because it doesn't tell us anything new, and if it doesn't agree with what we already know then it's obviously wrong. I don't think it's a trivial problem though. It's notoriously easy to twist stats to sell any narrative. And Goodhart's Law all but guarantees that any meaningful metric will get hacked.