to-tickets

To Tickets

Break a plan, spec, or conversation into a set of tickets: tracer-bullet vertical slices, each declaring the tickets that block it.

This repo tracks work in GitHub Issues. Use the gh CLI, which infers the repository from the clone.

Process

1. Gather context

Work from whatever is already in the conversation context. If the user passes a reference (a spec path, an issue number or URL) as an argument, fetch it and read its full body and comments.

2. Explore the codebase (optional)

If you have not already explored the codebase, do so to understand the current state of the code. Before exploring, read GLOSSARY.md at the repo root (or GLOSSARY-MAP.md and the per-context glossaries it points at) and the ADRs under docs/adr/ or src/*/docs/adr/ that touch the area. If they don't exist, proceed silently and don't create them. Ticket titles and descriptions should use the project's domain glossary vocabulary, and surface any ADR conflict rather than silently overriding it.

Look for opportunities to prefactor the code to make the implementation easier. "Make the change easy, then make the easy change."

3. Draft vertical slices

Break the work into tracer bullet tickets.

<vertical-slice-rules>

• Each slice cuts a narrow but COMPLETE path through every layer (schema, API, UI, tests): vertical, NOT a horizontal slice of one layer
• A completed slice is demoable or verifiable on its own
• Each slice is sized to fit in a single fresh context window
• Any prefactoring should be done first

</vertical-slice-rules>

Give each ticket its blocking edges: the other tickets that must complete before it can start. A ticket with no blockers can start immediately.

Wide refactors are the exception to vertical slicing. A wide refactor is one mechanical change (rename a column, retype a shared symbol) whose blast radius fans across the whole codebase, so a single edit breaks thousands of call sites at once and no vertical slice can land green. Don't force it into a tracer bullet; sequence it as expand–contract. First expand: add the new form beside the old so nothing breaks. Then migrate the call sites over in batches sized by blast radius (per package, per directory), each batch its own ticket blocked by the expand, keeping CI green batch to batch because the old form still exists. Finally contract: delete the old form once no caller remains, in a ticket blocked by every migrate batch. When even the batches can't stay green alone, keep the sequence but let them share an integration branch that all block a final integrate-and-verify ticket; green is promised only there.

4. Quiz the user

Present the proposed breakdown as a numbered list. For each ticket, show:

• Title: short descriptive name
• Blocked by: which other tickets (if any) must complete first
• What it delivers: the end-to-end behaviour this ticket makes work

Ask the user:

• Does the granularity feel right? (too coarse / too fine)
• Are the blocking edges correct: does each ticket only depend on tickets that genuinely gate it?
• Should any tickets be merged or split further?

Iterate until the user approves the breakdown.

5. Publish the tickets to GitHub

Publish one GitHub issue per ticket, in dependency order (blockers first), so each ticket's blocking edges reference real issue numbers. Use the issue template below.

1. Ensure the triage label exists: gh label create ready-for-agent --description "Fully specified, ready for an AFK agent" --color 0E8A16 (ignore an "already exists" error).
2. Create each issue: gh issue create --title "<ticket title>" --body-file -, with the ticket body on stdin. Apply the label as you create it (--label ready-for-agent), or afterwards with gh issue edit <number> --add-label ready-for-agent.
3. If the source was an existing issue, make each ticket its sub-issue: gh issue edit <parent> --add-sub-issue <child> (gh 2.94+). Older gh: gh api --method POST repos/<owner>/<repo>/issues/<parent>/sub_issues -F sub_issue_id=<child-db-id>. Without sub-issues, put Part of #<parent> at the top of the child body.
4. Set each blocking edge as a native GitHub issue dependency:

gh api --method POST repos/<owner>/<repo>/issues/<child>/dependencies/blocked_by -F issue_id=<blocker-db-id>

<blocker-db-id> is the blocker's numeric database id (gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/issues/<n> --jq .id), not the #number or node_id. Where dependencies aren't available, put a Blocked by: #<n>, #<n> line at the top of the child body instead.

1. Work the frontier: any open ticket whose blockers are all closed and that has no assignee. For a purely linear chain that means top to bottom.

Do NOT close or modify any parent issue.

<issue-template>

Parent

A reference to the parent issue on GitHub (if the source was an existing issue, otherwise omit this section).

What to build

The end-to-end behaviour this ticket makes work, from the user's perspective, not layer-by-layer implementation.

Acceptance criteria

• [ ] Criterion 1
• [ ] Criterion 2

Blocked by

• A reference to each blocking ticket, or "None (can start immediately)". Omit this section when blockers were set as native edges.

</issue-template>

In the issue body, avoid specific file paths or code snippets: they go stale fast. Exception: if a prototype produced a snippet that encodes a decision more precisely than prose can (state machine, reducer, schema, type shape), inline it and note briefly that it came from a prototype. Trim to the decision-rich parts, not a working demo, just the important bits.