The piece I keep running into with solo builders is that even when they have a good structure, the failure mode is trusting Claude's output too uniformly — treating fast generation as a proxy for correctness. The code looks clean, tests pass, ships fine... and then a month later nobody (including you) can reason about it because the decisions that shaped it never got persisted anywhere. Your decision capture artifact solves exactly that.

One thing I've been exploring from a complementary angle: rather than scaffolding the SDLC, building a clearer internal model of how Claude reasons — where it's reliable vs. where it needs human review gates. Working on a free starter pack around this (panavy.gumroad.com/l/skmaha) — would be curious if any of this maps to patterns you've seen with the scaffold.

  - /tasks:capture — Quick capture idea/bug/task to tasks/ideas/

  - /tasks:groom — Expand with detailed requirements → tasks/backlog/

  - /tasks:plan — Create implementation plan → tasks/planned/

  - /tasks:implement — Execute plan, run tests → tasks/done/

  - /tasks:review-plan — Format plan for team review (optionally Slack)

  - /tasks:send — Send to autonomous dev pipeline via GitHub issue

  - /tasks:fast-track — Capture → groom → plan → review in one pass

  - /tasks:status — Kanban-style overview of all tasks