Install
$ agentstack add skill-coleam00-skills-piv-slice-epic ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.
How agent discovery & health will work →About
/piv-slice-epic — Slice an Epic into PIV-Sized Tickets
The bridge between a strategic doc and the PIV loop. The epic doc is the destination; the PIV loop is the unit of motion; tickets are the bridge. /piv-slice-epic does the slicing.
Input
$ARGUMENTS— the epic to slice and its architecture decisions. These arrive as one doc or two:- a single architected epic that carries its own
## Architecturesection, or - an epic plus a separate, linked architecture page (the common case when the architecture lives beside the
epic — e.g. a Confluence epic page and its linked architecture page, both passed as URLs). Read both.
- greenfield: a PRD stands in for the epic.
When the inputs are tracker references (Confluence/Jira URLs or keys), fetch them from the source via the Atlassian MCP. This is the load-bearing input: the architecture names the seams, data model, and missing pieces the slices must respect.
- Not prime-dependent. A primed session helps, but isn't required. If the codebase surface isn't loaded, this
skill orients itself (Step 2) before slicing.
Process
Step 1 — Read the sources
Read the epic fully (goal, user stories, acceptance criteria, out-of-scope) and its architecture decisions, whether they are an ## Architecture section on the epic or a separate linked page (the approach, stack, data model, missing pieces, spikes). If the architecture is a separate page, fetch and read it too. The slicing has to respect those calls.
Step 2 — Orient on the code surface (if not already primed)
Slicing needs enough codebase awareness to judge what's independent vs dependent — file overlap, shared seams. If the session is already oriented, skip this. Otherwise explore it yourself — don't depend on a prior /prime-codebase: starting from the architecture's named seams, data model, and missing pieces, read the relevant files/dirs (e.g. the adapter interface, the orchestrator, the ingestion pipeline) to see what exists, what's reused, and where new code lands. Just enough to slice confidently — not a full re-derivation.
Step 3 — Decompose into PIV-sized slices
Break the epic into tickets. Scope these for AI, not for a human backlog — an agent loop carries far more than a traditional ticket: a small-to-medium implementation phase, ~8–10 subtasks, often 500–1500 lines of change (20–50% tests). A small epic might even be a single ticket. A well-sized ticket:
- Is one testable concern — easy to test, review, and prove on its own.
- Is one coherent unit — a vertical slice of behavior, not a horizontal layer.
- Has clear acceptance criteria of its own.
- Is small enough that one focused loop can one-shot it without context rot — not so large the agent loses
the thread and returns diminish.
Split by dependency, by concern, or as a slim end-to-end slice (prove the whole flow thinly, then fatten it next loop) — whatever makes each ticket easiest to prove. If a slice is too big to test or review in one honest pass, split it further. The planning detail stays high regardless — it's the scope that's larger.
Step 4 — Slice for parallelizability
Map dependencies between tickets. Independent tickets — ones that don't touch the same files or rely on each other's output — can run in parallel worktrees (see /worktree-create). Mark which tickets are independent and which form a dependency chain. Slicing along vertical-slice-architecture seams maximizes independence.
Plan just-in-time: a dependent ticket waits until its dependency is implemented, not just sliced — building the dependency informs the dependent's plan, so planning it early plans against a guess. Independent tickets can be planned and run in parallel; dependent ones wait their turn.
Step 5 — Write the ticket breakdown
Write the tickets to your tracker (Jira via the Atlassian MCP, Linear, GitHub Issues, Archon's tasks) — or to a local docs/tickets/.md if you're solo or have no tracker. Either way, every ticket carries its own context — that's what lets a loop pick it up later without re-reading the whole epic:
# Ticket Breakdown —
## Epic summary — goal in 2-3 lines
## Tickets
### TICKET-1 —
- Scope / acceptance criteria — one testable concern
- Per-ticket context: the doc sections, guides, and seams this ticket needs
(e.g. "source-adapter guide · seam: adapter interface · AC #2 + #4 from the epic")
- Files touched (estimate) · rough size (~500–1500 lines, incl. tests)
- Depends on:
### TICKET-2 — ...
## Dependency graph
## Suggested execution order
Wave 1 (parallel): TICKET-1, TICKET-3
Wave 2: TICKET-2 (after TICKET-1 is implemented)
Output
A ticket breakdown in your tracker (or docs/tickets/.md). Each ticket then enters its own PIV loop — straight to /piv-plan-implementation if it's well-scoped (it primes what it needs), or /prime-codebase first if it needs more codebase orientation. Priming is optional; the per-ticket context above is what makes that possible.
Notes
- Issue management is tool-agnostic: Jira (via Atlassian MCP), Linear, Notion, GitHub Issues, Archon's tasks — or just a folder of markdown files if you're solo. The tracker doesn't matter; the goal is to split the work just enough that each loop has the highest chance of one-shot success, so you can automate the loop.
- Greenfield: the same slicing applies to MVP phases instead of epic tickets.
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: coleam00
- Source: coleam00/skills
- License: MIT
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.