fix(conductor): improve track parsing robustness and cleanup documentation

[fernandomenuk]

Pull Request: Improve Track Parsing Robustness and Documentation Cleanup

1. Overview

This PR addresses several minor technical inconsistencies and documentation gaps identified during a repository audit. The primary focus is on making the implement command more resilient to different formatting styles in the tracks.md file and ensuring that our public-facing documentation and style guides are accurate and free of duplicates.

2. Problem Statement

1. Rigid Parsing Logic: The implement command previously relied on a strict heading format (## [ ] Track:) for identifying and updating tracks. However, the setup process and other commands often utilize a bulleted list format (- [ ] **Track:), which could lead to parsing failures or status update errors.
2. Duplicate Style Guidance: The C++ style guide template contained two separate entries for "Aliases," leading to redundant and potentially confusing information for users.
3. Incomplete Artifact List: The README.md omitted conductor/index.md from the list of files generated by /conductor:setup, which could lead to confusion for new users regarding the project structure.

3. Proposed Solution & Detailed Changes

File Path	Change Category	Description of Change
commands/conductor/implement.toml	Logic/Robustness	Updated the track selection and status update protocols. The regex-based parsing now looks for both - [ ] **Track: and ## [ ] Track: formats. This ensures that the agent can accurately identify and transition track statuses regardless of the initial formatting style used during track creation.
templates/code_styleguides/cpp.md	Documentation	Consolidated two separate "Aliases" entries into a single, comprehensive section. The updated entry emphasizes the use of using over typedef and clarifies the requirements for documentation and public API usage.
README.md	Documentation	Added conductor/index.md to the "Generated Artifacts" section under the /conductor:setup command description. This ensures the documentation is a 1:1 match with the actual scaffolding behavior.

4. Technical Rationale

• Resilient Parsing: By allowing multiple formats for track identification, we reduce the likelihood of the agent "getting stuck" if a user manually edits the tracks.md file or if different versions of the Conductor extension use slightly different formatting.
• DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself): Removing duplicate entries in the style guide reduces the maintenance burden and prevents contradictory guidance from creeping in over time.
• Transparency: Keeping the README.md in sync with the actual tool behavior is critical for maintaining user trust and reducing onboarding friction.

5. Verification Performed

• Manual Logic Audit: Reviewed the .toml prompt logic to ensure that the branching and replacement strings are correctly escaped and contextually accurate.
• Markdown Linting: Verified that the changes to cpp.md and README.md maintain proper markdown structure and rendering.
• Git State Check: Confirmed that all changes are staged and committed according to the project's conventional commit standards.

6. Checklist

• Changes adhere to existing workspace conventions and architectural patterns.
• No sensitive information or credentials are included.
• Commit messages follow the type(scope): description format.
• Documentation has been updated to reflect code changes.
• Verified that no regressions were introduced in existing command flows.