The most honest argument for using AI in a small business is not that it produces excellent work. It is that a great deal of necessary writing never gets done at all, and a mediocre first draft that exists in one minute is worth more than a good one that never gets written. The supplier letter that was put off for three weeks. The terms that were going to be written properly at some point. The description of a service that has been a placeholder for two years. The policy that a customer asked for and that nobody has had a spare afternoon to produce. In each case the realistic alternative is not a better document; it is no document, and that comparison is the one that matters.
There is a specific risk that comes with this, though, and it is not the one usually discussed. The danger is not that the output is bad - bad output gets noticed and fixed. It is that the output is competent. It is fluent, it is confidently expressed, it is laid out sensibly with headings, and it reads like something a professional produced. That surface competence makes it stop feeling like a draft. A person looking at a rough handwritten attempt knows immediately that it needs work; the same person looking at a polished page will read it, find nothing obviously wrong, and send it. The polish suppresses the editing it was meant to make easier.
What gets missed in that moment is not usually a factual error, which is what people watch for. It is the absence of the specific. A generated document about your services will describe services in general and will not contain the thing you actually do differently. A generated letter to a supplier will make a reasonable general case and will not mention that this is the third time, or that the last conversation ended with a promise. A generated policy will cover the standard situations and will omit the one awkward case that is the reason you needed a policy. Nothing in the text is wrong. What is missing is everything that made it worth writing.
The working habit that follows is simple to state and requires some discipline to keep: read the draft once specifically looking for what is missing rather than what is wrong. Ask what a reader who knows this business would notice was absent. Add the specifics yourself, because they are the part only you have. Then send it. Used that way, the tool does the part that was blocking the work - the structure, the opening sentence, the sheer effort of starting - and leaves the part that was always the point. What it should never do is let a document out of the building on the strength of reading well.