Because I noticed people at my work did similar requests to improve CI. The result was a faster CI, but full of cludges huge inline bash scripts in workflow YAML files, and effectively unmaintainable, unreviewable mess. After just a few rounds of these optimizations the entire CI setup is basically a Rube Goldberg machine but made of duct tape.
There's your answer right there, no need to ask.
Without human advice and a metric shit-tonne of guidance (either pre or post) - anything that requires active consideration of future maintenance burden will cost you 2x-10x of the time you think "saved" over a medium-term time-frame.
The alternative is to spend at least 50% (or sometimes up to %100) of the "saved" time in active review and iterative improvement of the solution design.