I mean you have to draw the line somewhere, many consonants are composed of multiple articulotary parts that you have to perform seperately. Simple stops, or better called plosives, can themselves be unreleased for example which means a /t/ for example is already a closure /t̚/ and then the release of /t/(idk if theres a diacritic to mark a release cause you already need a closure to be able to release something) so a t can be analyzed as /t̚t/ which might sound stupid but with english some of these interactions are actually noticable with depending on stress and the speakers accent a final t can be many things like unreleased(/t̚/), released(/t/) or even ejective(/t'/). Of course its absurd to assume things like these are valid analyses in any but a few select languages but that once again means that how you analyze things matters a lot on the language being analyzed. Who am i to say a language doesnt contrast /t̚/ and /t/ word finally, if you try it out you can hear the difference. So yeah to wrap it up a plosive is made out of a stop and a release and so is an affricate except that the release is of a different manner, but crucially, at the same place of articulation. This doesnt mean youre wrong cause i still think its a huge problem in linguistics that we just slap some random ass discription on things without elaborating and assuming everyone follows the same conventions. I have the same problem with narrow transcriptions, they should be very accurate but ive seen some stuff narrowly transcribed in a way that wouldnt pass as a proper broad transcription. In some languages affricates function completely as a single consonant and in some languages it just doesnt me sense to make that distinction.