Would it be completely unreasonable to allow `fundrawtransaction` to use unsafe outputs?

I understand this means the resulting transaction may be invalidated whenever the unsafe output I'm relying one disappears (e.g. because the transaction that produced it was RBF-ed) but in my case that's ok, I'll react to that and re-publish the tree of child transactions accordingly.

But let me know if you think that's too much of a footgun for users, in that case I'll architect my solution differently.
UniValue detail = DescribeWalletAddress(*pwallet, dest);
    ret.pushKVs(detail);
    ret.pushKV("ischange", pwallet->IsChange(scriptPubKey));
    ScriptPubKeyMan* spk_man = pwallet->GetScriptPubKeyMan(scriptPubKey);
    if (spk_man) {
        if (const std::unique_ptr<CKeyMetadata> meta = spk_man->GetMetadata(dest)) {
            ret.pushKV("timestamp", meta->nCreateTime);
            if (meta->has_key_origin) {
                ret.pushKV("hdkeypath", WriteHDKeypath(meta->key_origin.path));
                ret.pushKV("hdseedid", meta->hd_seed_id.GetHex());
                ret.pushKV("hdmasterfingerprint", HexStr(meta->key_origin.fingerprint));
            }
        }
    }
    
    
    
    
    
    UniValue labels(UniValue::VARR);
    const auto* address_book_entry = pwallet->FindAddressBookEntry(dest);
    if (address_book_entry) {
        labels.push_back(address_book_entry->GetLabel());
    }
    ret.pushKV("labels", std::move(labels));
    return ret;
},
    };
}
static RPCHelpMan getaddressesbylabel()