I think one of the most important considerations for any law of governmental system is to ask yourself not how it could ideally be used, but how it could be used or misused in case when there was a bad player in power. Because government is not objective nor benevolent. It's just a collection of individuals that some might argue self selects to some of the least desirable traits for those of such responsibility and power. And the thing that history has shown time and again is that it's not a question if a government will be corrupted, but when.

Take for instance gerrymandering. The system that enables it was created with great intentions. State populations change over time and so the idea is to let politicians, democratically elected, adjust the boundaries of various districts to compensate for changing populations over time. Great idea, but now it's little more than a tool for trying to screw over 'the other side' while bypassing democratic representation so much as possible. Imagine the potential for attacking companies, individuals, or groups with a tool as amorphous as a social credit system.

So I do actually agree with you, that if used properly it could really be a quite useful system. But, I would never support such a thing because, sooner or later, it will not be used properly - and the consequences will be dire.