用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt,粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里,让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
直接命令不会经过审查 Prompt;运行前请先检查来源。
npx skills add https://github.com/CodySwannGT/expostarter --skill lisa-task-decomposition命令会保持在同一行。复制前请横向滚动并检查完整内容。
想先保存到本地?可下载 SkillsMP 当前能够提供的文件。
基于 SOC 职业分类
正在显示 SKILL.md
| name | lisa-task-decomposition |
| description | Methodology for breaking work… |
Break work into ordered, well-scoped tasks that can be independently implemented and verified.
Start from the right shape:
That last point is a hard invariant — downstream validators (jira-validate-ticket, github-validate-issue, linear-validate-issue) gate writes on it, so a cross-repo leaf will fail to be created.
Apply this rule by layer:
| Layer | Repo scope |
|---|---|
| PRD / source initiative | MAY span repos — it describes the full initiative |
| Epic, Story, Spike | MAY span repos — these are coordination containers |
| Task, Bug, Sub-task, Improvement | MUST name exactly one repo — these are buildable leaf work units |
If a candidate work unit naturally touches multiple repos (e.g., "add field to backend API and consume it in mobile app"), do not write it as one ticket. Instead:
[backend-api] Add field to /users endpoint, [mobile-app] Display new field on profile screen).Dependencies in step 4 — typically the producing repo (backend) blocks the consuming repo (frontend/mobile).[repo-name] as a summary prefix so the repo is visible in tracker lists at a glance.Reject any work unit whose acceptance criteria reference behavior in a different repo from the one it's scoped to. If you find yourself writing "and the frontend should also...", that's a signal to split.
This is the decomposition-time strategy (greenfield — you are creating the tickets now, so a cross-repo PRD can stay whole, its Epic/Story/Spike containers can stay cross-repo, and a parent Story + per-repo children is the natural shape). It is distinct from the work-time strategy in the repo-scope-split rule, which applies when an agent picks up an already-existing leaf ticket to implement and discovers it spans repos: there it narrows the original in place and spins off sibling work units rather than introducing a new parent. Use the phase-appropriate one; do not mix them.
For each task, define what "done" looks like:
Each task must have a verification method. Choose the most appropriate:
| Verification Type | When to Use |
|---|---|
| Unit test | Pure logic, data transformations, utility functions |
| Integration test | Cross-module interactions, database operations, API contracts |
| E2E test | User-facing workflows, multi-service interactions |
| Manual verification | UI/UX behavior, visual correctness, one-time infrastructure changes |
| Build verification | Compilation, type checking, linting, bundle size |
| Deploy verification | Service health checks, smoke tests, monitoring dashboards |
Map each task to the skills needed to complete it. This enables delegation to specialized agents or helps identify what expertise is required.
## Task Breakdown
### Task 1: [[repo-name] imperative description]
- **Repository:** [single repo name, or N/A for Epic/Story/Spike]
- **Acceptance criteria:**
- [specific, measurable criterion]
- [specific, measurable criterion]
- **Verification:** [type] -- [how to verify]
- **Dependencies:** [none | task IDs that must complete first]
- **Skills:** [list of skills needed]
### Task 2: [[repo-name] imperative description]
- **Repository:** [single repo name, or N/A for Epic/Story/Spike]
- **Acceptance criteria:**
- [specific, measurable criterion]
- **Verification:** [type] -- [how to verify]
- **Dependencies:** [Task 1]
- **Skills:** [list of skills needed]
### Execution Order
1. [Task 1, Task 3] (parallel -- no dependencies)
2. [Task 2] (depends on Task 1)
3. [Task 4] (depends on Task 2, Task 3)
### External Dependencies
- [dependency] -- [who owns it] -- [current status]