grooming-sprint-tasks

name	grooming-sprint-tasks
description	Grooms sprint tasks by cross-referencing Monday.com board with GitHub issues across multiple repos, then produces subitems, descriptions, linked issues, and SP estimates. Use when grooming a sprint, planning sprint tasks, preparing for sprint planning, or when user says "groom", "sprint planning", "cross-reference tasks and issues", "add subitems", or "create missing issues".

Grooming Sprint Tasks

Overview

Sprint grooming means every task gets: subitems, a detailed description, linked GitHub issues, proper labels, SP estimate, and priority. This skill automates the cross-referencing of Monday.com tasks with GitHub issues across multiple repos, identifies gaps, and produces fully groomed tasks.

Process

Phase 1: Gather All Data

Collect from three sources in parallel:

Monday.com board:

1. get_board_info — learn column IDs, status labels, groups, epics
2. GraphQL query for items by sprint group:

   query { boards(ids: [BOARD_ID]) { groups { id title items_page(limit: 100) { items { id name } } } } }
   

3. get_board_items_page with includeColumns: true, includeSubItems: true — get full details

GitHub issues (ALL repos, in parallel):

gh issue list --repo ORG/REPO --state open --limit 100 --json number,title,state,labels,body,url

Check every repo the team works in — not just the obvious one.

GitHub labels (ALL repos, in parallel):

gh label list --repo ORG/REPO --json name,description,color --limit 50

Know what labels exist before assigning them. Create new labels if the repo is missing useful ones.

Phase 2: Cross-Reference Tasks ↔ Issues

For each sprint task:

1. Identify repos — Which repo(s) does this task touch? A task can span multiple repos.
2. Find matching issues — Search by keywords in issue titles across all repos
3. Classify the result:

Result	Action
Task has matching issues	Link them in the task description
Task has NO matching issues	Create issues (with full grooming — see Phase 3)
Open issue has NO matching task	Suggest adding task to sprint, or note as backlog
Issue is superseded by new work	Close with comment explaining what replaces it

Phase 3: Produce Groomed Output Per Task

Every task (except DoD/ceremony tasks) needs ALL of these:

A. Subitems

RULE: 3-5 subitems per task, each independently completable

• Break the task into concrete work items
• Set "Days to Complete" for each subitem — sum should ≈ Est SP
• Reference issue numbers in names when applicable: "Table rendering in chat UI (client #1802)"
• Names should be descriptive enough to understand without the parent context

Create via Monday API:

create_item with parentItemId → creates subitem
columnValues: {"numbers": "0.5"} → sets Days to Complete

B. Task Description (Monday update/comment)

Every task gets an update in this format:

📋 Sprint Grooming Notes

[2-3 sentences: what this task is and why it matters]

🔗 Repo: org/repo-name
🎫 Issues:
• repo #NUM (title) — URL
• repo #NUM (title) — URL
📎 Related: repo #NUM (brief note on relationship)

[Dependencies or blockers if any]

Acceptance criteria:
• [Concrete, testable criterion]
• [Concrete, testable criterion]
• [Concrete, testable criterion]

Multi-repo tasks list all repos and issues.

C. GitHub Issues (for gaps)

New issues must be fully groomed — not just a title:

## Context
[What this is and how it fits into the system]

## Motivation
[Why this matters — user impact, business value, what breaks without it]

## Scope
- [ ] Checkbox for each piece of work

## Technical Notes (if applicable)
[Schema, API contracts, data shape, file paths]

## Dependencies (if any)
[What must exist first]

## Acceptance Criteria
[How we know it's done]

Labels: Assign MULTIPLE relevant labels — not just enhancement. Use domain-specific labels (agent, evals, tools, resources, security, observability, etc.). Create labels if the repo is missing useful ones:

gh label create "label-name" --repo ORG/REPO --color "HEX" --description "Description"

Phase 4: Validate

After grooming, verify:

Check	How
SP total vs capacity	Sum Est SP. Compare against sprint working days. Flag overload.
Committed vs buffer	High + Medium = committed. Best effort = buffer that can slip.
Missing fields	Every task needs: Owner, Est SP, Priority, Type, Epic
Subitem math	Sum of subitem days ≈ parent Est SP
Issue coverage	Every non-DoD task has at least one linked GitHub issue
Orphan issues	Open issues not in any sprint task → note for backlog discussion

Phase 5: Present Summary

After all grooming, present to the user:

1. Task list — table with: task name, SP, priority, repos, issue count
2. SP breakdown — committed SP vs buffer SP vs capacity
3. Issues created — table with: repo, issue #, title, labels
4. Issues closed — any superseded issues
5. Labels created — new labels added to repos
6. Remaining gaps — anything still missing

Red Flags — STOP

Thought	Action
"This task only touches one repo"	VERIFY — many tasks span 2+ repos
"enhancement label is enough"	ADD domain-specific labels too
"The subitem name is self-explanatory"	ADD days-to-complete anyway
"I'll skip the issue body, title is clear"	WRITE full Context/Motivation/Scope/AC
"I'll just check shapes-agent issues"	CHECK ALL REPOS — client and server too
"No existing issues match, moving on"	CREATE the missing issues
"Description can be brief"	INCLUDE repos, issue links, and acceptance criteria

Anti-Patterns

Single-repo tunnel vision: Checking only one repo when a task spans agent + MCP + client. Always check all repos.

Label laziness: Slapping enhancement on everything. Use agent, evals, tools, resources, security, observability, performance, etc.

Skeleton issues: Creating issues with just a title and no body. Every issue needs Context, Motivation, Scope, and Acceptance Criteria.

Missing cross-links: Creating issues but not linking them back to the Monday task description. The Monday update must reference every related issue with URLs.

Subitem vagueness: "Do the thing" subitems with no days estimate. Each subitem needs a clear name and days-to-complete.

Ignoring superseded issues: Old issues that are replaced by new work should be closed with a comment, not left open to confuse future sprints.