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.

The issue tracker and triage label vocabulary should have been provided to you. If not, tell the user to run /setup-matt-pocock-skills.

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. Ticket titles and descriptions should use the project's domain glossary vocabulary, and respect ADRs in the area you're touching.

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.

• 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's smart zone, not the window's raw advertised ceiling (smart-zone block below)
• Any prefactoring should be done first

A slice is sized to fit in one fresh session's smart zone — roughly the first 100K–150K tokens of a fresh context window, where the agent still reasons sharply. The window's advertised size is only the raw ceiling; past the smart zone the agent drifts into the dumb zone, still executing but sloppier, more forgetful, more mistake-prone. Plan around the smart zone, never the window: the practical budget is the tokens the agent works well within, not the tokens it can technically hold.

Estimate the ticket's context spend (read + write + reasoning) and cut it until it lands comfortably inside the smart zone. Signals that a ticket overshoots into the dumb zone: the agent must read hundreds of files, write thousands of lines, or sustain many rounds of reasoning to land it. When in doubt, split it — a ticket drafted for the raw window is really several smart-zone tickets.

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)
• Does every ticket sit comfortably inside the smart zone, or would any push its agent into the dumb zone?
• 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 the configured tracker

Publish the approved tickets. How depends on the tracker /setup-matt-pocock-skills configured; the tickets are the same either way, only the shape of the blocking edges changes:

• Local files → write one file per ticket under .scratch/<feature-slug>/issues/<NN>-<slug>.md, numbered from 01 in dependency order (blockers first). Each file's "Blocked by" lists the numbers/titles it depends on. Use the per-ticket file template below: one ticket per file, never a single combined file.
• A real issue tracker (GitHub, Linear, …) → publish one issue per ticket in dependency order (blockers first) so each ticket's blocking edges can reference real identifiers. Use the platform's native blocking relationship where it has one; otherwise set each ticket's "Blocked by" to the blocking issues. If the source was an existing issue, make each ticket its sub-issue (tracker doc's operation). Apply the ready-for-agent triage label unless instructed otherwise; the tickets are agent-grabbable by construction.

Work the frontier: any ticket whose blockers are all done. For a purely linear chain that means top to bottom.

Do NOT close or modify any parent issue.

:

What to build: the end-to-end behaviour this ticket makes work, from the user's perspective, not a layer-by-layer implementation list.

Scale: estimated to fit within one smart zone (roughly <150K tokens of read + write + reasoning)

Blocked by: the numbers/titles of the tickets that gate this one, or "None (can start immediately)".

Status: ready-for-agent

• Acceptance criterion 1
• Acceptance criterion 2

Parent

A reference to the parent issue on the tracker (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.

Scale: estimated to fit within one smart zone (roughly <150K tokens of read + write + reasoning)

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.

In either form, 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.

6. Language

Write ticket bodies in English. Tickets are work items for agents, not primary content — never attach ## Chinese Summary (non-authoritative) comments to tickets, sub-issues, or follow-ups. A Chinese summary applies only to primary content (the spec issue a to-spec run published, for a personal repo), never per ticket or per run.