sirius-cc-wu/breakdown

Breakdown

Use this skill after feature-level discovery and design to turn repo stories into directly executable work.

If you need a starting folder for a new feature, scaffold the default breakdown files with:

python3 skills/breakdown/scripts/scaffold_breakdown.py <feature-slug>

By default this creates:

docs/features/<feature-slug>/slice-planning.md
docs/features/<feature-slug>/slice-traceability.md

If .skills/planning.json defines planning_dir, the scaffold uses <planning_dir>/<feature-slug>/ instead unless --base-dir is passed.

For subfeature-local breakdown work, you can also scaffold directly into an existing subfeature path:

python3 skills/breakdown/scripts/scaffold_breakdown.py \
  docs/features/<feature-slug>/subfeatures/<subfeature-id>

When the target path is a real subfeature with .subfeature-meta.json, the scaffold seeds subfeature context from the metadata and impact-analysis.md so the resulting breakdown artifacts stay anchored to the affected parent stories, slices, and baseline docs.

Responsibilities

1. Validate that stories are concrete, scoped, and ready for decomposition.
2. Split oversized work into smaller, independently verifiable execution packets.
3. Produce planning artifacts that preserve story-to-slice traceability, increment grouping, sequencing, and execution mode assumptions.
4. Create executable work items, dependency links, and explicit parallel-safe lanes where appropriate.
5. Hand off ready work to review-planning; after human approval and planning commit, execution can bootstrap with slice.

Required Output

• <feature_path>/slice-planning.md
• <feature_path>/slice-traceability.md

Resolve <feature_path> as either:

• <planning_dir>/<feature-slug>/ for canonical feature planning

• <planning_dir>/<feature-slug>/subfeatures/<subfeature-id>/ for a selected subfeature

• If .skills/planning.json defines planning_dir, use that as <planning_dir>.

• Otherwise default to docs/features.

Preferred execution output when available:

• planned slices and dependency links

Use assets/slice-planning-template.md as the default starting point for <feature_path>/slice-planning.md. Use assets/slice-traceability-template.md as the default starting point for <feature_path>/slice-traceability.md. Use scripts/scaffold_breakdown.py when you want both files scaffolded together from a feature slug or an explicit subfeature path.

Breakdown Rules

• Keep stories and design in repo docs; keep executable slices in the repository's planning artifacts.
• Prefer repository story sizes such as S, M, L, and XL.
• Record an explicit story risk for decomposition decisions, using low, medium, or high.
• Split any XL item before creating execution-ready slices.
• Do not assume only XL stories may split. A smaller S/M/L story may still split when risk, coupling, or validation shape would make one packet brittle.
• Every executable slice should be small enough to fit one slice-scoped execution slice.
• Group related slices into small, demonstrable increments before bootstrapping slices.
• Prefer execution packets that stay within one subsystem or a small set of files.
• Every execution-ready slice should have concrete acceptance notes and a validation command or artifact check.
• Preserve stable story identifiers so slice traceability is durable.

Sizing and Risk Heuristics

Use size as the default signal and risk as the override signal.

• S and M stories usually stay as one planned slice unless there is a clear reason to split.
• L stories may stay whole when the work is cohesive and low-risk, but may split when the work naturally falls into independently verifiable packets.
• XL stories should be split before they become execution-ready.
• high risk can justify splitting even when the story is not XL.

Treat risk as elevated when one or more of these are true:

• the work crosses multiple subsystems or ownership boundaries
• the work mixes separate validation paths that would be clearer in separate packets
• the work includes migration, reconciliation, replacement, or compatibility impact
• the work has high coupling, fragile sequencing, or non-trivial handoff risk
• the acceptance path is ambiguous unless the work is decomposed further

When you choose keep, split, or defer, record both the size and the risk and explain the primary reason in slice-planning.md.

Increment Planning

Use increments to bridge repo-level planning and slice-level execution:

• an increment is a small, demonstrable outcome made from one or more execution-ready slices
• Increment 1 should usually be the simplest end-to-end usable path
• increments belong in slice-planning.md and slice-traceability.md, not in spec-slice state
• one increment can contain multiple planned slices, but each slice still gets its own execution slice later
• if a story spans multiple increments, record that explicitly instead of hiding it in notes

Execution Mode and Packet Design

Default to single-agent execution when:

• work has a tight critical path
• slice coupling is high and handoff risk is non-trivial
• codebase context is concentrated in one subsystem

Prefer multi-agent execution only when:

• there are clear parallel lanes with minimal overlap
• integration points can be validated with deterministic checks
• ownership and handoff boundaries can be documented explicitly

When a story becomes execution-ready:

• split it into small packets when size or risk indicates the story would be brittle as one execution item
• mark blockers and sequencing constraints explicitly
• label only genuinely independent slices as parallel-safe
• if using multi-agent, record lane ownership, handoff targets, and an integration checkpoint after each lane

Execution Backlog Guidance

Use slice-planning.md as the execution backlog:

• create one planned slice per directly executable work item
• group those slices under increment headings in slice-planning.md
• use parent-child relationships when a larger story needs grouped sub-slices
• record blockers as explicit dependency links in slice-planning.md
• reflect safe parallel lanes and integration checkpoints in slice-planning.md
• keep mapping from repo story IDs to planned slice IDs in slice-traceability.md

Record slices and dependencies directly in slice-planning.md and use it as the primary execution backlog.

Default Slice ID Naming

Unless the repository explicitly overrides slice naming in .skills/conventions.json, use this default convention:

• planned slice IDs should use <scope-prefix>-<capability-slug>
• use a short lowercase alias derived from the owning feature slug for feature-scoped breakdown
• use a short lowercase alias derived from the owning subfeature ID for subfeature-scoped breakdown
• when planning is subfeature-local, prefer the subfeature prefix rather than the parent feature prefix
• avoid meaningless generic prefixes such as bare slice-*

Examples:

• feature-scoped: atf-read-file, tpm-runner, wmt-write-file
• subfeature-scoped: shp-store, dmc-capture-policy, mrc-retrieval-startup

Story-to-Slice Mapping

Treat repo story IDs as the planning-system identifiers and planned slice IDs as the execution identifiers.

Default mapping:

• one repo story can map to one or many planned slices
• each execution-ready work item becomes one planned slice
• preserve the repo story ID in:
  • slice-traceability.md
  • the planned slice description
• use dependency links only for real execution blockers, not for narrative grouping

Preferred description shape for a new slice:

Story: <story-id>
Increment: <increment-id>
Slice: <short slice name>
Acceptance:
- ...
Validation:
- ...

If one repo story splits into multiple executable work items:

• keep the story as a repo concept in user-stories.md
• create multiple planned slices
• optionally create a non-executable parent item only when it helps grouped review
• record the story-to-slice fan-out in slice-traceability.md with one planned slice per row

Only reuse the repo story ID as the planned slice ID when all of the following are true:

• the repo story maps to exactly one executable work item
• the team wants the story ID preserved end-to-end
• that ID will not collide with another execution item

Otherwise, use an opaque slice ID and keep the repo story ID in traceability metadata.

Workflow

1. Read discover.md, system-design.md, optional ui-design.md, and user-stories.md. For subfeatures, also read impact-analysis.md and the canonical feature's user-stories.md, slice-planning.md, and slice-traceability.md.
2. Validate that each story has scope, acceptance notes, an explicit size, and an explicit risk rating.
3. Split oversized work into smaller execution packets and group them into increments with clear demo outcomes.
4. Choose single-agent or multi-agent handling where relevant and record lane assumptions.
5. Write slice-planning.md and slice-traceability.md with increment groupings, dependency notes, parallel-safe lanes, and integration checkpoints as needed.
6. Create planned slices and dependency links for execution-ready work, keeping packet validation explicit.
7. Run python3 skills/guide-planning/scripts/manage_planning.py sync-status <feature-selector> --through breakdown_ready so planning metadata records that breakdown artifacts are ready for review.
8. Stop when each slice is ready for review-planning and later bootstrap by slice after approval and planning commit.

When generating slice-planning.md, start from assets/slice-planning-template.md and replace placeholders rather than inventing a new structure each time. When generating slice-traceability.md, start from assets/slice-traceability-template.md and replace placeholders rather than inventing a new table shape each time.

Guardrails

• Do not create execution slices directly from vague stories.
• Do not mirror external execution states inside feature planning docs.
• Do not turn increments into execution states or spec-slice containers.
• Do not turn slice-planning.md into a slice-scoped execution checklist; that belongs to guide-execution and blueprint later.
• Do not mark work as parallel-safe unless overlap and integration risk are genuinely low.
• Do not group multiple planned slice IDs into one slice-traceability.md row; repeat the story row so each planned slice can be mapped back deterministically.
• If a slice still needs major replanning, split it again before handoff.
• Do not fall back to bare slice-* IDs unless a repository-specific convention explicitly requires them.
• For subfeatures, only plan the new or amended slices needed by the change; keep references to superseded canonical slices in notes or dependencies rather than reusing them as subfeature-local slice IDs.