I’ve finished the three runs. Each left something for me to review before starting more work.
Logfetch has a real scaffold and 24 feature records, all still passes: false and in backlog.
AgentWatch has eight records for capabilities it already has and 13 proposed changes parked at
waiting_approval, all of it inside gitignored files. Director has 20 suggestions, all pending.
None of that is an application change waiting to happen automatically.
Three stop conditions
Create Fresh stopped because I checked blueprint-only. It committed the repository foundation after
smoke:qc, persisted the feature graph and roadmap, and did not continue into the first product
feature.
Project intake stopped differently. It was allowed to write only inside .aidd, and its parking
step moved all 13 open records behind waiting_approval before the final report. The pipeline
completed, but the response review still said the handoff was open: 12 sections assessed, not 50
prompts answered by someone with the authority to answer them. The review still needed answers about product ownership, security policy, incident history, and
release authority.
Director never entered a project checkout at all. Its cycle wrote a 37-project fleet summary, capped the output at 20 suggestions, then left every one of them pending. Even a High-risk row in that list is a recommendation with evidence attached, not a launched recipe.
What I would decide next
For Logfetch I would start with the dependency graph, and specifically with local file access. The blueprint decided that Logfetch reads logs off the local disk, and safe file access became one of the four deepest records in that graph. The run asked no interview questions, so it inferred that choice from the sentence I typed. I can change it before implementation starts. I also need to review how the blueprint divides the work between React, htmx fragments, and streaming.
For AgentWatch I would read the interview review beside the generated remediations, then keep only the findings I can defend against the source. I would also answer the five urgent owner questions before treating technically valid remediations as an approved v1 plan.
For Director I would start with ownership. The lockfile pattern belongs in Spernakit and then Dance. The artifact-maintenance rows each need a separate decision about whether the project belongs in the managed fleet and whether the file is actually stale.
I stopped the walkthrough here to review those decisions.
The links below start another pass through the map. They do not resume hidden work from this one.
Where do you go from here?
- You have another idea - start a fresh project and stop at its reviewed blueprint.
- Your repository has changed - return to the existing-project path and refresh what aidd knows.
- Your fleet needs another look - run Director against the catalog before selecting project work.
- You want to begin again - return to the opening fork and choose a different route.