### Fit-for-Purpose Verdict **Supports well: profiling and column-level inspection.** Each of the five tables (January through May 2022, 446 rows in total) can be examined on its own. The 100% completeness score means column-level checks, such as value distributions and field inspection, will not be undermined by missing data. The largest-table share of 26% (January 2022, 115 rows) shows no single table dominates, so findings from one month are not skewed by an outsized neighbor. **Limited by: no validated joins.** Nothing in the profile links the five tables, so any aggregation that spans them is unreliable. Totals, trends, or comparisons across January to May 2022 would rest on assumptions the data has not confirmed. The 100% referential integrity score does not offset this. It is vacuous: with no foreign key relationships detected, there are no constraints to violate, so the score says nothing about whether the tables fit together. The same goes for the 100% overall score, which should be read as "clean within each table," not "ready for combined analysis." **Top remediation steps** 1. **Establish relationships before combining tables.** No foreign key relationships were detected, so referential integrity is vacuously 100%. Define and validate the keys that connect the tables, or confirm in writing that they are meant to stand alone. 2. **Hold cross-table aggregation until step 1 is done.** Keep analysis to single-table, column-level work in the meantime, which the data supports well. 3. **Re-run profiling after the keys are defined.** The referential integrity score only becomes meaningful once real constraints exist to test against.