The SQL Server Licensing page should take into account the licensing model of monitored SQL Server instances. For example, Azure SQL Server VMs running under a Pay-As-You-Go licensing model should be identified and optionally excluded from the license requirement calculations.

If the purpose of the page is to help customers understand how many SQL Server licenses they need to purchase or maintain, consumption-based instances should be clearly highlighted and treated differently from instances covered by traditional licensing.

Otherwise, the licensing figures may be misleading, as Pay-As-You-Go workloads do not contribute to the customer's on-premises or bring-your-own-license requirements. Adding this distinction would make the licensing report significantly more accurate and actionable.