to-issues

name	to-issues
description	Break a plan, spec, or the current conversation into independently-grabbable GitHub issues using tracer-bullet vertical slices. Use when user wants to convert a plan into issues, create implementation tickets, or break down work into issues.
disable-model-invocation	true

To Issues

Break a plan into independently-grabbable GitHub issues using vertical slices (tracer bullets).

Process

1. Gather context

Work from whatever is already in the conversation context. If the user passes a GitHub issue number or URL as an argument, fetch it with gh issue view <number> (with 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, follow ../domain-modeling/DOMAIN-AWARENESS.md. Issue titles and descriptions should use the project's CONTEXT.md vocabulary.

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 plan into tracer bullet issues. Each issue is a thin vertical slice that cuts through ALL integration layers end-to-end, NOT a horizontal slice of one layer.

Slices may be 'HITL' or 'AFK'. HITL slices require human interaction, such as an architectural decision or a design review. AFK slices can be implemented and merged without human interaction. Prefer AFK over HITL where possible.

- Each slice delivers a narrow but COMPLETE path through every layer (schema, API, UI, tests) - A completed slice is demoable or verifiable on its own - Each slice is sized to fit in a single fresh context window - Prefer many thin slices over few thick ones - Any prefactoring lands first

Give each slice its blocking edges — the other slices that must complete before it can start. A slice 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 issue 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 an issue 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 issue — green is promised only there.

4. Quiz the user

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

• Title: short descriptive name
• Type: HITL / AFK
• Blocked by: which other slices (if any) must complete first
• User stories covered: which user stories this addresses (if the source material has them)

Ask the user:

• Does the granularity feel right? (too coarse / too fine)
• Are the dependency relationships correct?
• Should any slices be merged or split further?
• Are the correct slices marked as HITL and AFK?

Iterate until the user approves the breakdown.

5. Create the GitHub issues

For each approved slice, create a GitHub issue using gh issue create. Use the issue body template below.

Create issues in dependency order (blockers first) so you can reference real issue numbers in the "Blocked by" field.

## Parent

# (if the source was a GitHub issue, otherwise omit this section)

What to build

A concise description of this vertical slice. Describe the end-to-end behavior, not layer-by-layer implementation.

Acceptance criteria

• Criterion 1
• Criterion 2
• Criterion 3

Blocked by

• Blocked by # (if any)

Or "None - can start immediately" if no blockers.

Avoid specific file paths or code snippets in issue bodies — 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.

Do NOT close or modify any parent issue.