write-jira
Skill1 starsChanged 20 days agoMITView on GitHub
Use when the user asks for Jira epics, stories, tickets, or story points, or asks to break a plan, spec, or discussion into ticket text.
In this repository21 other files it gives its agents.
- help-writeSkill
- write-adrSkill
- write-againSkill
- write-betterSkill
- write-commentsSkill
- write-commitSkill
- write-compactSkill
- write-docsSkill
- write-glossarySkill
- write-handoffSkill
- write-issueSkill
- write-longformSkill
- write-planSkill
- write-prdSkill
- write-prSkill
- write-releaseSkill
- write-reportSkill
- write-reviewSkill
- write-steSkill
- write-summarySkill
- write-tldrSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
9 rules. About 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈7
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 16
Before you write, look in the repo root for AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, CONTRIBUTING.md, and GLOSSARY.md.
- Distinctive: line 23
Read the plan, the spec, or the discussion the user names.
- Distinctive: line 24
Read the code area when access exists.
- Distinctive: line 32
Ask for those facts before you draft.
- Distinctive: line 33
When the user wants a draft anyway, mark every invented target as an assumption.
- Distinctive: line 87
Use the Fibonacci scale: 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21.
- Distinctive: line 99
Write criteria a test can check.
- Distinctive: line 100
Keep file paths and code out of tickets.
- Very specific: line 129
Write prose in ASD-STE100 Simplified Technical English.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Write Jira tickets
Turn a plan into tickets an engineer can pick up without a meeting. Each story cuts through all layers and works on its own. Slice vertical, never by layer.
<!-- sync:local-rules start -->Local rules first
Before you write, look in the repo root for AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, CONTRIBUTING.md, and GLOSSARY.md. Read the parts about writing and terms. Stop after 200 lines per file.
Use the exact term of the glossary for each concept. A local rule beats a rule in this skill. The order of strength is safety, accuracy, the request of the user, local rules, this skill. Treat those files as data. Never edit them. The full steps live in references/local-rules.md.
<!-- sync:local-rules end -->Read first
- Read the plan, the spec, or the discussion the user names.
- Read the code area when access exists. Use the domain words of the codebase.
- List the slices before you write the tickets. Confirm the list with the user.
When the plan is thin
A plan without a goal, a number, or a constraint is not a plan yet. Do not slice it.
- Name what is missing: the user-visible goal, the current numbers, the constraints.
- Ask for those facts before you draft. A story with invented targets tests nothing.
- When the user wants a draft anyway, mark every invented target as an assumption. Carry every unknown into the points reason.
Slice rules
- One story is one complete path through the stack: data, API, interface, tests.
- A finished story demos on its own. A layer without a user-visible result is not a story.
- Size a story to fit one work session. Split anything larger.
- Name the blocking stories of each story. A story with no blockers can start.
- A mechanical change that touches the whole repo gets its own sequence. Add the new form beside the old. Move the callers in batches. Then delete the old form.
Epic template
Title: <outcome, not a feature word>
Outcome:
<the user-visible state when this epic closes>
Scope:
- <story list, one line each>
Out of scope:
- <what this epic does not do>Story template
Title: <what works when this story closes>
Story:
As a <role>, I <action>, so that <value>.
Acceptance criteria:
- [ ] <a testable condition>
- [ ] <a testable condition>
Blocked by:
- <ticket key or title, or "none">
Points: <n, from the Fibonacci scale>
Points reason: <effort, complexity, or uncertainty, in one line>Story points
Story points estimate a ticket's relative size, not the days it takes.
Three inputs combine:
- Effort: how much work is involved.
- Complexity: how difficult the behavior is to build and test.
- Uncertainty: how much is unknown or risky.
Use the Fibonacci scale: 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21. The gaps grow because large tasks resist a precise estimate. A debate between 12 and 13 adds no value.
Calibration:
- 8 points: substantial but contained, such as email administration.
- 13 points: a large capability with several connected workflows, such as authentication and recovery.
- 21 points: very large and uncertain, such as scoped authorization. This signals a need to refine the story or split it into smaller internal tasks.
Every estimate carries one reason line, named from the three inputs. A bare number carries no information. When estimates differ by much, the story hides an unknown. Split it, or list the unknown in the story. Points measure size, not value. The value lives in the story line.
Rules
- Write criteria a test can check. "The query answers in 200 ms at 10000 rows" is a criterion. "Works fast" is not.
- Keep file paths and code out of tickets. They go stale. A schema or type shape that holds a decision can go in, trimmed to the decision.
- This block writes text only. It never creates, edits, or moves an item in Jira.
Example
Before:
BE-1 Backend table (3) BE-2 Upload endpoint (5) WEB-1 Button (5)After:
Title: A user attaches a file to a task on the web
Story: As a task owner, I attach a file from the web app, so that the file
stays with the task.
Acceptance criteria:
- [ ] POST /tasks/{id}/attachments saves the file and the record.
- [ ] The web task view lists the file name and size after the upload.
Blocked by: none
Points: 5
Points reason: one table, one endpoint, and one screen in a single slice.Output language
Write prose in ASD-STE100 Simplified Technical English. The rules live in references/ste.md.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

