Write Script to Determine Relative "Core" account Costs for Every "Workload" Account

**Describe the Issue**
We want to estimate how much charges increase in the "Core" accounts when we create new "Workload" accounts. These charges would be associated with networking, security, logging, etc. We want to be able to reproduce these numbers via a script so that we have more vision and clarity into the costs of the SEA.

**Additional Context**
- When you list accounts via the AWS Organizations CLI you can see that the date created is stored as metadata on the account
- The billing utility already has the ability to summarize charges for all "Core" accounts over a date range
- ECF Forge might be the cleanest place to do this, but I'm not sure how the billing utility will work there as we only use it in ECF Live
- ECF Live has charges in the "Core" accounts for things like Cloud Guard CSPM subscriptions, and AWS Enterprise Support which may skew the data, but also may be the easiest place to start
- Warren and I also talked about weighting the workload accounts on their spend but unsure if that's the road we want to go down

**Acceptance Criteria**
- Use the existing billing utility to generate a comparison of (Monthly? Weekly?) cost of the "Core" accounts VS number of "Workload" accounts that existed at that time

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

**Extra Template Info**

***Definition of Ready***
These set of conditions will need to be met in order to bring a ticket into the sprint and start work. Protects the team from unclear requirements.
Issues (Task/Story/Spike) aligned to an EPIC and linked appropriately.
Assigned to the appropriate CPF MEMBER (and is not left blank in ZenHub) at the start of sprint (1st day of the sprint)
Acceptance has been defined for the issue and has been reviewed with CPF team and approved by the necessary approver.
Has been sized and estimated by the delivery team.
Detailed breakdown of the steps required to complete the story in the additional context
Any additional specifications have been documented, reviewed with CPF and approved by the necessary approver.

***Acceptance Criteria***
A set of pre-defined requirement that need to be met in order to mark the user story as “done”.
It should be testable with no room for interpretation
It should be either “pass” or “fail”
It should be clear enough for business stake holders to understand
As part of the user story, it should be written from the user perspective
A well written acceptance criteria is great for
- managing expectations
- defining scope
- reducing ambiguity
- establishing testing criteria for QA
Given (Pre-condition)
When (Action)
Then (Outcome)

***Definition of Done***
These set of conditions are met for work to be considered as complete on an issue.
All acceptance criteria(s) have been validated.
All the necessary documentation for the issue has been uploaded to Teams.
Functionality has been tested when applicable.
Functionality has been demonstrated to the relevant stakeholders (where applicable).
Story has been scheduled for a Sprint Demo/community update and impacted teams invited to the Demo.
Stories accepted by PO and documented for potential sharing with impacted users.
- Documented = Captured in Community Update (CU) deck
- Release notes = aspirational goal of providing a bulleted list of features and changes that our users can touch. Was going to store them in our Cloud Pathfinder repo. Can also display to users in the CU