I think this looks great but "process-neutral" gives me pause. Process is important, and hard, and in practice "process-neutral" means "process by committee within each customers organisation" and naturally, that committee probably hasn't designed a great process before and so they're going to end up designing a subpar process... and for people subjected to that process, it'll reflect on your software.

For example, Jira isn't itself bad, Jira is quite nice in a vacuum, but Jira in the hands of an organisation is a nightmare because of the incoherent methods of working layered on top of it by well meaning but inexperienced process administrators who think configuring Jira is the solution to every delivery challenge faced in their org.

I've worked at half a dozen places I can think of off the top of my head where they've excitedly jumped into using a new (to them) issue tracking product, everyone loved it because it was new and exciting and empty and solved a problem... for a few months, and then people grew to hate it because it becomes an esoteric mess again. For example, Trello -> Notion -> Coda in the space of 18 months.

The decision to be process-neutral is a valid one and can be a very powerful foundation of a product, so my question is: do you have any specific thoughts around how you're going to be process-neutral while also stay loyal to the commitments you've made to being pleasant to use? If you can achieve that, a product that doesn't reflect the bad choices of administrators, I think you have incredible potential.