# Backlog Tasks > Decomposes a PRD, spec, or feature description into shippable stories with acceptance criteria. Use when asked to "break this into tickets", "generate tasks", "write user stories", "create acceptance criteria", or "decompose this feature for engineering". - Skill: `nicoladevera/backlog-tasks` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add nicoladevera/backlog-tasks` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/nicoladevera/backlog-tasks/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Product & Planning - Author: nicoladevera (https://skillmd.com/u/nicoladevera) - Updated: 2026-09-17 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/nicoladevera/backlog-tasks --- # backlog-tasks Generate stories and tasks with acceptance criteria from any source artifact. The skill decomposes a product artifact into discrete, shippable units of work — each one specific enough that a coding agent with human oversight can pick it up and implement it without follow-up questions. --- ## What It Accepts Any source artifact: - A PRD (structured or rough) - An engineering design document (EDD) - Meeting notes - A Slack thread - Rough notes or bullet points - A verbal description captured as text The input does not need to be polished. The skill extracts the work to be done and structures it. --- ## Instructions ### 1. Read the source artifact fully Understand the full scope before decomposing. Note: the problem being solved, the proposed solution, scope boundaries, edge cases, dependencies, and any data requirements. If these aren't explicit in the source, infer what you can and flag gaps. ### 2. Load reference files Read these files — they define the standards for stories and AC: - `references/acceptance-criteria.md` — Every AC must meet these standards - `references/story-structure.md` — Story scoping, splitting, and structure standards - `references/agent-readable-output.md` — Agent Block format and shared enum vocabulary ### 3. Load company context (if available) If `company/facts/product.md` exists and is substantive, read it for product context that affects how stories should be scoped (e.g., which services exist, what teams own what). If `company/norms/team-process.md` exists and is substantive, read it for how stories are typically structured at this company (sprint cadence, ticket conventions, definition of done). If either file exists but is still a stub template, treat it as unavailable and say so in the output. If neither substantive file is available, proceed — note the absence in the output. ### 4. Decompose into stories Break the source artifact into discrete, shippable units of work. Apply the scoping standards from `references/story-structure.md`: - Each story should be **one deployable unit** — buildable, testable, and shippable independently - If a piece of work touches multiple services or layers (frontend + backend), split it into separate stories linked by dependencies - If AC span different user flows, split into separate stories - Keep stories right-sized: more than 8-10 AC usually means multiple stories are bundled ### 5. Write each story For each story, produce: **Title:** Imperative, user-facing when possible, specific enough to distinguish from other stories on a board. **Description:** 2-3 sentences covering what this story does, why it exists, and where it fits in the product. Not a repeat of the AC — it's the context an implementer needs. For agent implementers, include explicit pointers: which service, which screen, which API. **Acceptance Criteria:** Given/When/Then format meeting all standards in `references/acceptance-criteria.md`: - Specific enough for an agent to implement without questions - Input/output explicit - Boundary conditions declared - Error states as separate AC - Data tracking included where relevant **Dependencies:** Other stories, teams, or external systems this story depends on. Flag whether it's a hard block or soft dependency. **Notes:** Any splitting recommendations, risks, assumptions, or implementation hints. ### 6. Separate data stories Analytics events, dashboards, instrumentation, and schema changes get their own stories. Don't bury "and track the event" as a final AC in a feature story. For each data story: - Name exact events and payloads (field names and types) - Specify pipeline destination - Reference the feature story it relates to - Include dashboard or monitoring requirements if applicable ### 7. Flag cross-story dependencies After all stories are written, review the full set and explicitly flag dependencies: - Which stories must be completed before others can start - Which stories can be worked in parallel - Which stories share an API contract or data schema that needs to be defined first ### 8. Suggest implementation sequence Order stories by suggested build sequence: - Foundation stories first (shared API contracts, core data models) - Feature stories next (can often be parallelized once foundations are in) - Data stories alongside or after their feature counterparts - Note which stories can be worked in parallel ### 9. Flag items needing PM input If any stories have ambiguity that the PM should resolve before engineering picks them up, list them explicitly. Common reasons: - Scope questions the source artifact didn't answer - Edge cases where the right behavior isn't clear - Dependencies with unknown owners or timelines - Data requirements where the event schema needs PM/analytics alignment --- ## Output Format ````markdown ## Generated Tasks: [Source Document Title] ```yaml agent_block: skill: backlog-tasks story_count: [integer] flagged_item_count: [integer — items needing PM input before implementation] external_dependency_count: [integer — dependencies on teams outside this sprint] implementation_sequence_defined: [Yes / No] ``` ### Summary [Total story count. Brief description of how the source was decomposed — what logical groupings emerged. Any major assumptions made during decomposition.] --- ### Stories #### Story 1: [Title] **Description:** [2-3 sentences — what, why, and where it fits] **Acceptance Criteria:** - **Given** [precondition], **When** [action], **Then** [expected result] - **Given** [precondition], **When** [action], **Then** [expected result] **Dependencies:** [Other stories, teams, or systems — or "None"] **Notes:** [Splitting recommendations, risks, or assumptions] --- #### Story 2: [Title] [Same structure] --- [Continue for each story] --- ### Data Stories #### Data Story: [Title] **Description:** [What's being instrumented and why] **Events:** | Event Name | Trigger | Payload | |------------|---------|---------| | [event_name] | [When it fires] | [field: type, ...] | **Related Feature Story:** [Which story this supports] **Notes:** [Pipeline destination, dashboard requirements, schema considerations] --- ### Implementation Sequence [Ordered list with parallel tracks noted] 1. **First:** [Foundation stories — API contracts, core models] 2. **Then (parallel):** [Feature stories that can be built simultaneously] 3. **Alongside:** [Data stories paired with their feature counterparts] 4. **Last:** [Stories that depend on everything above] **Dependency diagram** *(include when 3 or more stories have cross-story dependencies; omit if all stories are independent)* ``` [Story A] [Story B] \ / [Story C] | [Story D] ──── [Story E] ``` Label each box with the story title or ticket ID. Show only load-bearing dependencies — don't diagram every story if most are independent. ### Flagged Items - [Stories or decisions that need PM input before engineering starts] > **Context note:** [State which substantive company files were loaded, which files were absent, and which files existed but were stub templates and therefore skipped. Note what the decomposition might miss without that context.] ```` --- ## Quality Bar The output should meet these tests: - **Could an agent pick up any story and start work?** Each story has enough context, specific-enough AC, and clear-enough scope that implementation can begin without reading the full source document. - **Do all AC meet acceptance-criteria.md standards?** Given/When/Then. Specific. Testable. Boundary conditions declared. Error states specified. No subjective language. - **Are data stories separated?** Instrumentation, events, and dashboards are their own stories, not afterthoughts buried in feature stories. - **Are dependencies visible?** Cross-story and cross-team dependencies are flagged, not implied. - **Is the sizing right?** Stories are deployable units — not too large (multi-sprint epics) and not too small (single AC without context). - **Does the implementation sequence make sense?** Foundation work comes first. Parallel tracks are identified. Nothing is scheduled before its dependencies. --- ## Save After producing the artifact, write it to `knowledge/tasks/` using the naming convention: `feature-name-tasks.md`, where `feature-name` is a lowercase hyphenated slug derived from the source document title. Report the saved file path in the conversation.