# Future Work — claude-jacked

> Generated 2026-03-16 via `/swarm-research` (5 agents) + `/dcr` (4 reviewers + pre-mortem). Validated against Claude Code native features, plugin ecosystem (9,000+ plugins), and Gary Tan's gstack.

## Executive Summary

A 5-agent swarm-research session identified potential new commands, then a full DCR review pressure-tested them against the existing ecosystem. Result: most proposals already exist as native Claude Code features, community plugins, or in gstack. The highest-value work is **subtracting** redundant features and **enhancing** existing commands, not adding new ones.

---

## Priority 1: Subtract and Consolidate

### Audit existing commands against native Claude Code — DONE

**Completed:** 2026-03-21. Full audit at `docs/command-audit-2026-03.md`.

**Results:** 16 user-facing entities assessed. All KEEP except `/learn` and `/swarm` marked EVALUATE:
- `/learn` — overlaps with Auto-Memory but is more structured (graduation path, version-controlled, auditable). KEEP with distinction notes added.
- `/swarm` — thin wrapper around native Agent Teams but adds file isolation + scaling heuristics. KEEP for now, monitor.
- `/handoff` — confirmed DO NOT BUILD.
- Surface area: 16 user-facing entities, within the 15-18 budget. New commands require deprecating one.

### Progressive disclosure for `jacked install`

Currently: all-or-nothing install (14 commands, 10 agents, 7 skills = 31 entities). New users see a wall of options.

**Proposal:** `jacked install --core` installs essentials only (e.g., `/dc`, `/dcr`, `/learn`, `/pr`, `/release`). Full `jacked install` adds everything. Dashboard groups commands by category (Quality, Planning, Git, Meta).

---

## Priority 2: Enhance Existing Commands

### Embed changelog generation in `/release`

Rather than a standalone `/changelog` command (which exists in the ecosystem already — ComposioHQ, MCP Market, gstack's `/ship`), add a step to the existing `/release` pipeline:

- Before creating the GitHub release, generate a structured changelog from `git log <last-tag>..HEAD`
- Group by conventional commit type (feat/fix/refactor/docs)
- Cross-reference closed GitHub issues via `gh`
- Use as `--notes` content instead of `--generate-notes`
- Effort: S

### Make `/whats-next` feedback-aware

Instead of custom state persistence (which competes with native Tasks system), add lightweight feedback:

- At the start of a run, read the most recent `.claude/pm/retro.md` if it exists (from a future `/retro`)
- Show a one-line "last run recommended X — you did Y (commit abc)" breadcrumb by scanning git log for evidence of past recommendations
- Don't build a full state machine — the 80/20 version is "mention what changed since last time"
- Effort: S-M

---

## Priority 3: Conditionally Build

### `/retro` — only if differentiated from gstack

**gstack's `/retro`** (https://github.com/garrytan/gstack/tree/main/retro) already does:
- Git history analysis with time windows (7d, 14d, 30d)
- Velocity metrics, commit type breakdowns, streak tracking
- JSON snapshots in `.context/retros/` for trend comparison
- `/retro compare` for week-over-week analysis

**jacked's angle (if we build it):** The unique value would be a feedback loop with `/whats-next` — "last time I recommended X, you did Y instead, here's what happened." gstack's retro is standalone; ours would feed into the planning cycle. Only build if this loop is the core feature, not the git analysis (which gstack already does better).

- Effort: M
- Prerequisite: `/whats-next` feedback awareness (Priority 2)

---

## Priority 4: Future Considerations (Not Now)

These emerged from the swarm-research but were deprioritized by the DCR review. Revisit when the ecosystem stabilizes.

| Idea | Why Not Now | Revisit When |
|------|-----------|-------------|
| `/discover` (competitive analysis) | Zero user demand signal; premature | User base grows beyond solo developer |
| `/sprint` (sprint planning) | Imposes process solo devs resist | Team features are needed |
| `/explain` (architecture walkthrough) | alexanderop/walkthrough exists; Claude does this natively with 1M context | Native explanation features plateau |
| `/adr` (decision records) | Duplicates existing `docs/` design doc pattern | ADR pattern gains traction in the community |
| `/spec` (feature specification) | Spec-driven development trend is real but tooling is unstable | GitHub Spec Kit or similar standardizes |
| `/today` (daily standup summary) | Cited in GitHub issue #29585; may go native | Anthropic hasn't shipped it after 6+ months |
| `/blast` (blast radius analysis) | Compelling safety feature; no ecosystem equivalent found | After Priority 1-3 are done |
| `/deps` (dependency audit) | Better handled by dedicated tools (Dependabot, Snyk) | If MCP integrations make it natural |
| `/onboard` (new contributor guide) | Low urgency for a solo-maintainer project | Contributors start joining |

---

## Competitive Landscape (as of March 2026)

### Gary Tan's gstack

https://github.com/garrytan/gstack — 9 slash commands organized around team-role personas:
- `/retro` — engineering retrospective with git analytics and trend tracking
- `/ship` — full release workflow with built-in changelog generation
- `/plan-ceo-review` — product-level planning review
- `/plan-eng-review` — architecture/technical review
- `/review` — production risk code review
- `/qa`, `/browse` — browser-based QA

**Key insight:** gstack treats release as a workflow (`/ship` = merge + test + bump + changelog + push + PR), not a sequence of standalone commands. This is more ergonomic than separate `/changelog` + `/release`.

### Claude Code Native Features (Feb-March 2026)

- **Auto-Memory / MEMORY.md** — persistent cross-session context
- **Session Memory** — automatic session summaries
- **Remote Control** — cross-device session access
- **Agent Teams** — native TeamCreate/TaskCreate/SendMessage
- **Tasks** — persistent task tracking across sessions
- **`--resume`** — restore full session context
- **`/remember`** — promote patterns to permanent config
- **Plugin Marketplace** — official Anthropic marketplace (launched March 7, 2026)

### Plugin Ecosystem Highlights

- **9,000+ Claude Code plugins** in the wild
- **Changelog generators:** ComposioHQ/awesome-claude-skills, MCP Market, buildwithclaude
- **Session handoff:** 5+ community implementations (MCP Market, t0ddharris, parcadei/Continuous-Claude-v3)
- **Architecture walkthrough:** alexanderop/walkthrough (interactive HTML + Mermaid diagrams)
- **Retrospectives:** Smithery.ai bitwarden/retrospecting, sprint retro automation

---

## Meta-Insight: The Subtraction Imperative

The pre-mortem analyst identified the most important finding: **claude-jacked has robust processes for adding features but zero processes for removing them.** The behavioral rules say "NEVER defer known issues" but feature bloat is a known issue that's invisible because no tool detects it.

Before adding any new commands, establish:
1. **Usage audit:** Which commands are actually used? (Would require opt-in telemetry or periodic user surveys)
2. **Redundancy check:** Which commands duplicate native Claude Code features?
3. **Deprecation policy:** How are commands retired? Announcement → deprecation warning → removal over 2 releases?
4. **Surface area budget:** Set a max command count (e.g., 15-18) and require deprecating something before adding something new.

---

## Research Sources

### Swarm Research (Phase 1 — 5 agents)
- Agent 1 (competitive analysis): Cursor, Windsurf, Cody, Continue.dev, aider, Devin, Copilot Workspace, Augment Code, developer productivity platforms
- Agent 2 (internal analysis): Full read of all 14 commands, 7 skills, 10 agents
- Agent 3 (platform vision): SDLC lifecycle mapping, phased maturity model, market trends
- Agent 4 (user pain points): GitHub issues, HN/Reddit discussions, SlopCodeBench research on AI code erosion
- Agent 5 (PM vision): Product management tools, lightweight agile, discovery session design

### DCR Review (4 reviewers + pre-mortem)
- Reviewer A: Claude Code changelog, plugin marketplace, ecosystem overlap analysis
- Reviewer B: Gary Tan's gstack analysis, UX/flow review of proposals
- Reviewer C: Maintainability audit, cross-command coupling analysis, marketplace overlap
- Pre-mortem: Feature bloat scenario, Anthropic overlap scenario, new user overwhelm scenario
