kanmer-groom

name	kanmer-groom
description	Groom and triage a Kanmer board by actually fixing it — dedupe near-duplicate tickets, fill in missing areas and profiles, split oversized tickets, archive dead ones, chase stale taken tickets, and repair off-board statuses. Use when the user says "groom the backlog", "tidy the board", "triage", "clean up the tickets". DO NOT USE FOR reporting problems without changing anything (kanmer-report).

Grooming a Kanmer board

Standup flags board problems; groom fixes them. But the board is the human's shared workspace, so grooming is propose-then-apply: one batch of findings, their sign-off, then the edits — never a silent reshuffle of someone else's backlog.

1. Scan

get_status (warnings count), list_board, list_items include_archived: true, and get_activity for recent movement. Look for:

• Near-duplicates — search_items on suspicious title pairs; two tickets describing one unit of work.
• Missing fields — no area on a board that has areas; no profile, so the ticket silently inherits its area's default when a different one fits where the user uses them.
• Doc-gate debt — tickets with docs_todo: true whose governing PRD/FRD/ADR was never linked, or missing a doc a later stage requires (get_doc_gates names the gap). These silently stall at the next gate; hand them to kanmer-docs to link/write the doc, or link_doc an existing one.
• Oversized tickets — bodies describing several units of work, or checklists that sprawl past one deliverable.
• Dead tickets — untouched for months, superseded, or describing code that no longer exists.
• Board-vs-reality sweep — before calling an open ticket stale, list only non-archived Backlog or Preparing tickets. For each candidate, search main history twice: the exact ticket id and a distinctive title phrase; when GitHub is available, search merged PRs too. A keyword/title hit is only a lead: open the matched commit, diff, or PR and record what portion of the ticket actually shipped. In the proposed batch, include the ticket id and stage, searches/sources, commit or PR evidence, shipped versus remaining scope, and one proposed disposition: no action, an Outcome note plus archive for wholly delivered work, or a concrete rescope for partial delivery. The sweep never archives or rescopes automatically — the user signs off before Apply changes the shared board. CORE-028 (PRs #57/#59) is the whole-delivery archive example; GUI-076 (9ec7741) is the partial-delivery rescope example. Both records are already repaired, so a current run excludes them rather than mutating the live board to recreate the defect.
• Stale takes — taken with no activity since (>3 days), branch/ worktree pointing at work nobody is doing.
• Off-board statuses and file warnings from list_items — data problems the tools can repair via move_item / update_item. A move crosses at most one gated boundary, so a ticket parked several stages from where it belongs is walked there one stage at a time; a single corrective jump is refused even when every document exists. That refusal is the rule working, not a broken ticket, and there is no way around it: update_item status runs the same gate check as move_item.

2. Propose

One message: each finding, the proposed fix, grouped by kind. The user's repo, their priorities — especially for archiving and splitting.

3. Apply

• Duplicates: keep the better ticket, merge anything unique from the other into it (body or docs), link them, archive the loser. Don't delete.
• Splits: file the new tickets (kanmer-tickets conventions), move the relevant checklist items over, link with rel: "blocks" where order matters, shrink the original.
• Fields: update_item with expected_updated — grooming touches many items, and a conflict means someone else is editing; re-read, don't clobber.
• Stale takes: ask the owner (or the user) before releasing someone else's take; a release without a note strands the worktree — record the branch/worktree in the checklist progress notes first, per kanmer-execute's pausing rules.
• Archive with archived: true; delete_item only on the user's explicit ask.

Converting grouping labels into groups

A board that has been running a while grows labels doing a group's job — v3-phase-4, epic-billing, q3 — one of the failures groups exist to fix (PRD-001 problem 2). A label can be filtered on and nothing else: no title, no shared context, no progress.

Only convert labels that name a body of work. A label describing a property of a ticket — bug, blocked, security, good-first-issue — is a label doing a label's job. Leave it. The test is whether the label could sensibly have a goal and a completion percentage.

1. Preview, and stop. For each candidate: the label, the proposed group, the ticket count and how many are already done. This writes to every matched ticket and update_item stamps updated, so a wrong run lights up every card on the human's board at once. Do not skip the confirmation because the mapping looks obvious.
2. Create the group — epic for a body of work, horizon for a time-ordered lens — with a context.md naming the plan and governing documents that bind its members. That shared context is most of the value: it is written once and read by every member's agent.
3. Set groups on each ticket. Membership lives on the ticket (ADR-0001); never write a member list into the group. Members and progress are derived.
4. Leave the labels in place. Removing them in the same pass makes the run irreversible for no gain. Drop them later, once the groups are trusted.
5. Re-read before each patch. Build the patch from a fresh get_item, not from a list captured before the run started. A ticket that gained a group earlier in the same pass has a stale groups array in that list, and patching from it silently erases the membership you just wrote.
6. Verify against the source. Each group's derived complete/total must equal a direct count of tickets carrying the label. A mismatch means membership did not land — which is exactly how step 5's bug shows itself.

Idempotent by construction: a ticket already naming the group is skipped, and a no-op update_item does not bump updated. A second run should report zero patches.

For horizons, derive the split from something real — the roadmap's ordering, blocks edges, what is actually taken. An invented NOW/NEXT is worse than none, because a horizon filter that does not match reality teaches people to ignore it.

4. Report

What changed, one line per item, plus what you deliberately left alone and why. Grooming that can't be audited is indistinguishable from damage.

---

No successor — control returns to the user. Grooming changes the board, not the work: nothing here moves a ticket forward through its pipeline. Tickets this run made ready go to kanmer-research when someone starts them, doc-gate debt goes to kanmer-docs, and a board that needs describing rather than fixing was kanmer-report's job in the first place.