And for very good reasons indeed. With the number of satellites they have and the number of other things in LEO, there's a legit need for automated planning/alarming of future collision avoidance maneuvers. Both by spacex and by third party operators. I guess what I meant is that despite them publishing the ephemerides of the satellites one thing that shall remain opaque to an outsider is details like how long a prograde burn lasts, how much fuel it consumes, how much calculated delta-v each burn imparts to a satellite (you can't know this unless you know the precise weight of the satellite and its estimated remaining onboard propellant).
I think calculating an accurate expected degradation in orbit from the point of view of a spacex outsider would also be hard unless you were in possession of the 3D modeling datasets that document exactly how much drag the satellite has in different orientations. Reasonably decent estimates can be made, but I'm sure SpaceX has much better data. One of the most interesting satellites in recent memory is one that was specifically designed to be long and somewhat streamlined to prolong its lifespan at very low orbital altitude: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GOCE