{
  "source": "fb10b21c2a01365d82c1ac44d6fd53f67b9db644",
  "selectionStartedAt": 1789606364941,
  "transcript": {
    "status": "ready",
    "calls": [
      {
        "sessionId": "5c14c0cc-8a60-4658-9cd5-92d2171f7dc0",
        "toolUseId": "toolu_01NUFdXRt7cZQgoo2Nam6ZBT",
        "questions": [
          {
            "question": "D1 \u2014 Add gstack skill routing rules to this project's CLAUDE.md?\nProject/branch/task: gstack-plan-count-hjFkjH on main, reviewing PLAN.md (saved project views).\nELI10: gstack works best when your project's CLAUDE.md includes skill routing rules, so that requests like \"review my diff\" or \"why is this broken\" automatically route to the right skill. This is a one-time setup prompt per project. Note: plan mode is active, so if you pick A the append and commit happen after the review finishes and plan mode exits.\nStakes if we pick wrong: Low either way; without routing you invoke skills by name manually.\nRecommendation: A because routing rules make later sessions faster with zero downside for a fixture repo.\nNote: options differ in kind, not coverage \u2014 no completeness score.\nNet: convenience of auto-routing vs. keeping CLAUDE.md untouched.",
            "header": "Routing",
            "options": [
              {
                "label": "Add routing rules (recommended)",
                "description": "Append the standard gstack skill-routing section to CLAUDE.md and commit it once plan mode exits.\n\u2705 Future requests auto-route to /investigate, /review, /ship etc. without remembering names\n\u2705 Standard block, identical across gstack projects; easy to remove later\n\u274c Adds ~20 lines to CLAUDE.md and one commit to a repo that is currently a single-file fixture"
              },
              {
                "label": "No thanks, invoke manually",
                "description": "Record routing_declined=true so this prompt never fires again for this project.\n\u2705 CLAUDE.md stays exactly as checked in; no extra commit\n\u2705 Re-enable any time with gstack-config set routing_declined false\n\u274c You type skill names yourself every time"
              }
            ]
          },
          {
            "question": "D2 \u2014 Enable cross-project learnings search?\nProject/branch/task: gstack-plan-count-hjFkjH on main, reviewing PLAN.md (saved project views).\nELI10: gstack logs small lessons (command quirks, pitfalls) per project. With cross-project search on, reviews in this repo can also pull lessons learned in your other projects on this machine. Everything stays local; nothing leaves the machine. Recommended for solo developers. Skip if you work across multiple client codebases where mixing context is a concern.\nStakes if we pick wrong: Minor; either setting is a one-line config flip later.\nRecommendation: A because more prior learnings means fewer repeated mistakes, and the data stays on your machine.\nNote: options differ in kind, not coverage \u2014 no completeness score.\nNet: broader recall vs. strict per-project isolation.",
            "header": "Learnings",
            "options": [
              {
                "label": "Enable cross-project (recommended)",
                "description": "Set cross_project_learnings=true; learnings search spans all local projects.\n\u2705 Patterns found in other repos (e.g. migration pitfalls) surface in this review\n\u2705 Local only; no network, no data leaves the machine\n\u274c Client-codebase contexts could bleed together if you consult for multiple orgs"
              },
              {
                "label": "Project-scoped only",
                "description": "Set cross_project_learnings=false; only this project's learnings are searched.\n\u2705 Strict isolation between codebases\n\u2705 Nothing from unrelated projects influences this review\n\u274c Repeats lessons already learned elsewhere on this machine"
              }
            ]
          }
        ],
        "answered": true,
        "failed": false,
        "answers": {
          "D1 \u2014 Add gstack skill routing rules to this project's CLAUDE.md?\nProject/branch/task: gstack-plan-count-hjFkjH on main, reviewing PLAN.md (saved project views).\nELI10: gstack works best when your project's CLAUDE.md includes skill routing rules, so that requests like \"review my diff\" or \"why is this broken\" automatically route to the right skill. This is a one-time setup prompt per project. Note: plan mode is active, so if you pick A the append and commit happen after the review finishes and plan mode exits.\nStakes if we pick wrong: Low either way; without routing you invoke skills by name manually.\nRecommendation: A because routing rules make later sessions faster with zero downside for a fixture repo.\nNote: options differ in kind, not coverage \u2014 no completeness score.\nNet: convenience of auto-routing vs. keeping CLAUDE.md untouched.": "Add routing rules (recommended)",
          "D2 \u2014 Enable cross-project learnings search?\nProject/branch/task: gstack-plan-count-hjFkjH on main, reviewing PLAN.md (saved project views).\nELI10: gstack logs small lessons (command quirks, pitfalls) per project. With cross-project search on, reviews in this repo can also pull lessons learned in your other projects on this machine. Everything stays local; nothing leaves the machine. Recommended for solo developers. Skip if you work across multiple client codebases where mixing context is a concern.\nStakes if we pick wrong: Minor; either setting is a one-line config flip later.\nRecommendation: A because more prior learnings means fewer repeated mistakes, and the data stays on your machine.\nNote: options differ in kind, not coverage \u2014 no completeness score.\nNet: broader recall vs. strict per-project isolation.": "Enable cross-project (recommended)"
        },
        "unansweredQuestionIndices": [],
        "answeredAt": "2026-09-17T00:50:39.158Z"
      },
      {
        "sessionId": "5c14c0cc-8a60-4658-9cd5-92d2171f7dc0",
        "toolUseId": "toolu_01JePZRM6FrCVyYbETbawgPJ",
        "questions": [
          {
            "question": "D3 \u2014 MODE: Which review posture should I take on the saved project views plan?\nProject/branch/task: gstack-plan-count-hjFkjH on main, reviewing PLAN.md (saved views: table + CRUD + picker).\nELI10: A review mode sets how hard I push on scope. Expansion means I pitch a bigger, better product. Selective means I keep your scope and offer add-ons one at a time for you to take or leave. Hold means I do not touch scope and go deep on failure modes, tests and edge cases. Reduction means I look for what to cut. This plan adds a capability to an existing task list (an enhancement) at roughly 12 files (estimate), which is under the cut threshold.\nStakes if we pick wrong: Too ambitious and you ship a bigger surface than the pilot needs; too narrow and the view scope model and filter serialization get locked in a shape that costs a migration later.\nRecommendation: SELECTIVE EXPANSION because this is an enhancement to a live system with two cheap-now, expensive-later design forks (shared views, canonical filter state) that deserve an explicit yes/no rather than silent omission or a full cathedral pitch.\nNote: options differ in kind, not coverage \u2014 no completeness score.\nNet: how much I push scope vs. how much I harden what is already there.",
            "header": "Review mode",
            "options": [
              {
                "label": "SELECTIVE EXPANSION (recommended)",
                "description": "Hold the current scope and run the HOLD checks, then offer each expansion (shared/team views, URL-shareable view links, default view per project, stale-filter handling, usage metrics) individually with effort and risk. You accept, defer, or skip each one.\n\u2705 Surfaces the two lock-in decisions (scope model, serialization) as explicit choices before code exists\n\u2705 Nothing enters scope without your yes; rejected items land in NOT in scope with a reason\n\u274c More questions than HOLD; expect 4\u20136 cherry-pick prompts before the deep review starts"
              },
              {
                "label": "SCOPE EXPANSION",
                "description": "Dream big: pitch the 10x version (views as a first-class platform: shared, default, linkable, pinned, with analytics) and recommend each piece enthusiastically.\n\u2705 Best if you want the platonic ideal of views laid out before you build anything\n\u2705 Catches adjacent delighters a narrow review would never raise\n\u274c For a two-week pilot of a filter-saving feature this is likely more surface than the team needs to learn from"
              },
              {
                "label": "HOLD SCOPE",
                "description": "Keep exactly the four approach bullets; go maximum depth on error paths, access control, race conditions, tests, observability and rollout for that scope only.\n\u2705 Fastest path to an implementable, hardened plan for the pilot\n\u2705 Zero scope negotiation; every question is about correctness\n\u274c Per-member-only scoping and the serialization shape get baked in without a deliberate decision"
              },
              {
                "label": "SCOPE REDUCTION",
                "description": "Propose the minimum core (e.g. remember last filter per member, or URL-state only) and ask per item what to defer.\n\u2705 Smallest possible diff for the pilot\n\u2705 Tests the premise cheaply before investing in CRUD + picker\n\u274c \"Named views you can reopen\" is already close to minimum; cutting further changes the goal, not just the scope"
              }
            ]
          }
        ],
        "answered": true,
        "failed": false,
        "answers": {
          "D3 \u2014 MODE: Which review posture should I take on the saved project views plan?\nProject/branch/task: gstack-plan-count-hjFkjH on main, reviewing PLAN.md (saved views: table + CRUD + picker).\nELI10: A review mode sets how hard I push on scope. Expansion means I pitch a bigger, better product. Selective means I keep your scope and offer add-ons one at a time for you to take or leave. Hold means I do not touch scope and go deep on failure modes, tests and edge cases. Reduction means I look for what to cut. This plan adds a capability to an existing task list (an enhancement) at roughly 12 files (estimate), which is under the cut threshold.\nStakes if we pick wrong: Too ambitious and you ship a bigger surface than the pilot needs; too narrow and the view scope model and filter serialization get locked in a shape that costs a migration later.\nRecommendation: SELECTIVE EXPANSION because this is an enhancement to a live system with two cheap-now, expensive-later design forks (shared views, canonical filter state) that deserve an explicit yes/no rather than silent omission or a full cathedral pitch.\nNote: options differ in kind, not coverage \u2014 no completeness score.\nNet: how much I push scope vs. how much I harden what is already there.": "SCOPE EXPANSION"
        },
        "unansweredQuestionIndices": [],
        "answeredAt": "2026-09-17T00:52:44.979Z"
      }
    ],
    "assistantMessages": [
      {
        "sessionId": "5c14c0cc-8a60-4658-9cd5-92d2171f7dc0",
        "text": "I'll start with the skill preamble, then the system audit.",
        "timestamp": "2026-09-17T00:49:22.375Z"
      },
      {
        "sessionId": "5c14c0cc-8a60-4658-9cd5-92d2171f7dc0",
        "text": "Landscape check done. Now recording Step 0 evidence (0A\u20130D) in the working plan before mode selection.",
        "timestamp": "2026-09-17T00:51:31.083Z"
      }
    ]
  },
  "pendingQuestion": {
    "sessionId": "5c14c0cc-8a60-4658-9cd5-92d2171f7dc0",
    "toolUseId": "toolu_01GeKyp4cFH9546t8Ch6CoRF",
    "questions": [
      {
        "question": "D4.0 \u2014 Nine expansion proposals are pending (E1 canonical filter state, E2 shared project views, E3 project default view, E4 shareable links, E5 stale-reference resilience, E6 Save/Save-as/Revert, E7 instrumentation + baseline, E8 auto-restore last view, E9 picker polish bundle). How should I walk them past you?\nProject/branch/task: gstack-plan-count-hjFkjH on main, SCOPE EXPANSION review of saved project views.\nELI10: Each proposal is an independent yes/no on scope, so the default is one question per item (nine short prompts, each with Add / Defer / Skip / Hold). That is a lot of clicks but every item gets your explicit call, and dependencies (E3 needs E2; E4, E5, E8 lean on E1) get surfaced as we go. Alternatively I can propose a smaller set first, or batch them into groups.\nStakes if we pick wrong: Batching hides individual items behind group picks; narrowing first means I pre-filter your decision space, which is the exact thing scope expansion mode is meant to avoid.\nRecommendation: A because every item is independent and you chose the mode that wants the full menu on the table.\nNote: options differ in kind, not coverage \u2014 no completeness score.\nNet: nine explicit decisions vs. fewer prompts with less granularity.",
        "header": "Chain pacing",
        "options": [
          {
            "label": "Full split, one per item (recommended)",
            "description": "Fire D4.1 through D4.9 sequentially, then D4.final to confirm the assembled scope.\n\u2705 Every proposal gets its own Add / Defer / Skip / Hold call with its dependency spelled out\n\u2705 Hold on any item stops the chain so we can discuss before continuing\n\u274c Nine prompts before the deep review begins (each is a single click)"
          },
          {
            "label": "Narrow first",
            "description": "I propose a smaller set (my pick: E1, E2, E5, E6, E7) and ask about only those; the rest go to NOT in scope as skipped-by-narrowing with a note.\n\u2705 Roughly half the prompts\n\u2705 Focuses on the lock-in and zero-silent-failure items\n\u274c I pre-filter your options, which cuts against the scope expansion posture you chose"
          },
          {
            "label": "Batch into groups",
            "description": "Three grouped questions: foundation (E1, E5, E7), sharing (E2, E3, E4), personal UX (E6, E8, E9), each with multi-select.\n\u2705 Three prompts instead of nine\n\u2705 Groups follow real dependency lines\n\u274c Defer vs Skip per item is lost; groups get one disposition unless you type overrides"
          }
        ],
        "multiSelect": false
      }
    ],
    "answered": false,
    "failed": false,
    "source": "pre_tool_use"
  },
  "viewport": "\u25cf Updated plan\n  \u23bf \u00a0/plan to preview\n\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\nPlanning: /tmp/g-vlxin2hi/gstack-paid-shard-sIo4dH/tmp/gstack-hermetic-1360145-Y5l0q9/with-skills/.claude/plans/mutable-\njingling-cerf.md\n\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\n \u2610 Chain pacing \n\n\u2502 D4.0 \u2014 Nine expansion proposals are pending (E1 canonical filter state, E2 shared project views, E3 project default \n\u2502 view, E4 shareable links, E5 stale-reference resilience, E6 Save/Save-as/Revert, E7 instrumentation + baseline, E8 \n\u2502 auto-restore last view, E9 picker polish bundle). How should I walk them past you?\n\u2502 Project/branch/task: gstack-plan-count-hjFkjH on main, SCOPE EXPANSION review of saved project views.\n\u2502 ELI10: Each proposal is an independent yes/no on scope, so the default is one question per item (nine short prompts,\n\u2502 each with Add / Defer / Skip / Hold). That is a lot of clicks but every item gets your explicit call, and dependencies\n\u2502 (E3 needs E2; E4, E5, E8 lean on E1) get surfaced as we go. Alternatively I can propose a smaller set first, or batch\n\u2502 them into groups.\n\u2502 Stakes if we pick wrong: Batching hides individual items behind group picks; narrowing first means I pre-filter your\n\u2502 decision space, which is the exact thing scope expansion mode is meant to avoid.\n\u2502 Recommendation: A because every item is independent and you chose the mode that wants the full menu on the table.\n\u2502 Note: options differ in kind, not coverage \u2014 no completeness score.\n\u2502 Net: nine explicit decisions vs. fewer prompts with less granularity.\n\n\u276f 1. Full split, one per item (recommended)\n     Fire D4.1 through D4.9 sequentially, then D4.final to confirm the assembled scope.\ufffd\u2705 Every proposal gets its own\n     Add / Defer / Skip / Hold call with its dependency spelled out\ufffd\u2705 Hold on any item stops the chain so we can\n     discuss before continuing\ufffd\u274c Nine prompts before the deep review begins (each is a single click)\n  2. Narrow first\n     I propose a smaller set (my pick: E1, E2, E5, E6, E7) and ask about only those; the rest go to NOT in scope as\n     skipped-by-narrowing with a note.\ufffd\u2705 Roughly half the prompts\ufffd\u2705 Focuses on the lock-in and zero-silent-failure\n     items\ufffd\u274c I pre-filter your options, which cuts against the scope expansion posture you chose\n  3. Batch into groups\n     Three grouped questions: foundation (E1, E5, E7), sharing (E2, E3, E4), personal UX (E6, E8, E9), each with\n     multi-select.\ufffd\u2705 Three prompts instead of nine\ufffd\u2705 Groups follow real dependency lines\ufffd\u274c Defer vs Skip per item is\n     lost; groups get one disposition unless you type overrides\n  4. Type something.\n\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\u2500\n  5. Chat about this\n\nEnter to select \u00b7 \u2191/\u2193 to navigate \u00b7 Esc to cancel\n",
  "originalOutcome": "fixture refused first pacing request; configured retry later passed; this fixture supplies no paid completion credit"
}