agentleFS
lynchypinlynchypin/project-onboard/skills/to-tickets/SKILL.md

to-tickets

Skill0 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub

Break the spec into small, independently-implementable tracer-bullet vertical slices. No checkpoint gate — hands off directly to wayfinder for implementation orchestration.

192 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use setup-ts-deep-modules, to-questionnaire and 10 more.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • liufeng1976Skill

    setup-ts-deep-modules

    Wire dependency-cruiser into a TypeScript repo so each package is a deep module — implementation hidden in subfolders, reachable only through its entry-point files. User-invoked.

    Also in 43 projects that use this

  • AWSSkill

    to-questionnaire

    Turn a decision you can't fully answer into a questionnaire for someone else to fill in.

    Also in 89 projects that use this

  • ryotaroh180105Skill

    claude-handoff

    Hand the current conversation off to a fresh background agent that picks up the work immediately.

    Also in 40 projects that use this

  • RoentekSkill

    loop-me

    Grill me about specs for the workflows I want to build, within this workspace.

    Also in 47 projects that use this

  • AWSSkill

    implement-spec

    Implement the result of /to-spec and /to-tickets in code.

    Also in 69 projects that use this

  • sponge-b0bSkill

    to-specs

    Project decision-complete planning into implementation Specs from exact Canonical Contract Ledger semantics while preserving Independent Specs and existing Spec identity.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • +2 more from aws

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

6 rules. 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 181 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 6

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Special case — wide refactors: Use expand-contract:

    line 36
  2. Distinctive:

    Expand: add the new form alongside the old.

    line 37
  3. Distinctive:

    Contract: remove the old form once no references remain.

    line 39
  4. Distinctive:

    Never produce horizontal-layer tickets where intermediate tickets don't independently do anything verifiable.

    line 66
  5. Distinctive:

    Never silently reorder or drop a slice without flagging it.

    line 68
  6. Distinctive:

    Never start implementation itself — hand off to wayfinder.

    line 69

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 181 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

To-tickets

Tracer-bullet vertical slices, not horizontal layers. Each ticket should be independently implementable and deliver end-to-end behavior, even if narrowly. Never "build the database layer" → "build the API" → "build the UI" as three tickets that are each individually useless.

The principle: make the change easy, then make the easy change. If a ticket requires prefactoring, that prefactoring is its own ticket listed as a blocker.

Process

  1. Read the spec (or CONTEXT.md summary for script-tier) and .agent/state.json for the doc tier and issue tracker.
  2. Gather context. Fetch referenced materials, explore the codebase to understand where changes land.
  3. Break the work into tracer-bullet slices. Each slice:
    • Sized to one context window — small enough to implement and review inside a single fresh context, before the window fills and attention degrades (see the "Smart zone" note in reference/context-budget.md). One ticket ≈ one context window is the sizing rule, not a rough guideline. If a slice can't plausibly be finished and reviewed before a context reset, it's too big — split it.
    • Complete enough to demo or verify on its own.
    • Ordered with explicit blocking dependencies.
  4. Special case — wide refactors. Use expand-contract:
    • Expand: add the new form alongside the old.
    • Migrate: batch changes by blast radius (smallest first).
    • Contract: remove the old form once no references remain.
  5. Match granularity to tier:
    • Script / tool: flat list, dependencies rarely matter.
    • App / system: explicit dependency tracking (B depends on A).
  6. Write tickets to the configured tracker (issue_tracker in state.json): local files in docs/agents/tickets/, or via GitHub/ Linear. Each ticket includes:

    • Title
    • Description of end-to-end behavior delivered
    • Acceptance criteria
    • Blocking dependencies (if any)

    Each ticket is self-contained — restate context rather than assuming the reader has the spec open.

  7. Present the breakdown to the user — what each slice does, in what order, and why. If risk_posture is "careful", explicitly note that implementation will pause after each ticket for confirmation.
  8. Hand off to wayfinder's implementation orchestration — it will invoke skills/implement/SKILL.md per ticket, respecting risk posture.

What this skill must never do

  • Never produce horizontal-layer tickets where intermediate tickets don't independently do anything verifiable.
  • Never silently reorder or drop a slice without flagging it.
  • Never start implementation itself — hand off to wayfinder.

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.