My last boss totally fucked up my daily stand-ups. I suggested them because, when I started, I found most work wasn't consistently tracked or even discussed. My boss's management style was panicking about everything and panic working while raging that no one else was also panicking about everything (spoiler: I also learned department turnover was high, can't imagine why), so I was trying to help implement any organization whatsoever. She quickly turned my 10 minute stand-ups into 1-1.5 hour slogs where each team member had to give an update on each of their projects, despite having earlier logged it all into the project tracker I created.

By far the worst micromanager and least competent person I ever worked for.

The frequency of standups should be determined by the team and blockers should never have to wait till standup to be surfaced.

I work on a growth product team and we frequently have devs pulled away to work on a feature in a different product. The engineers started losing track of availability of others and what features were going to prod became opaque. We opted to move back to daily standups with status reports as it kept the team informed and thus motivated, and gave an opportunity in several cases to refine approaches from the start.

There are, of course, other ways to accomplish this, like having a public issue board, but often private conversations don't make it to the issues.

Semi-agreed on daily standups -- the regular accountability drives productivity for a lot of people, but I also agree that daily is excessive. We've settled on 3 days/week and it works pretty well for both camps - 2 is probably fine, but 1 I would argue is missing the point.

Def agreed on 15 minutes, as you say - any longer and you lose both people and the purpose of the check-in.