write-task

A workflow for turning a feature request, change, or bug into a clear ticket for a development team. It describes the user problem, expected behavior, boundaries, and acceptance criteria.

In plain words
What is it for?
Writing concise tickets for tools such as Jira, Linear, ClickUp, GitHub Issues, or similar trackers.
Why use it?
It removes the guesswork and unnecessary implementation instructions that can make a ticket unclear or restrictive. It can read the code to ensure the ticket matches how the system actually works.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Install

Getting it into your agent

One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.

agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/yamanidev/claude-code-configuration/write-task
Any agent
npx skills add yamanidev/claude-code-configuration --skill write-task
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/yamanidev/claude-code-configuration

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Per session 76 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,037 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

What it costs to keep this loaded

Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00076 $0.01037
Opus 5 $0.00038 $0.00518
Sonnet 5 $0.00015 $0.00207
Haiku 4.5 $0.00008 $0.00104

Measured 2d ago against content hash f139fb6bc2d2, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

write-task scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 2d ago.

A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.

Nothing flagged

None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.

skills/write-task/SKILL.md · 59 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 59 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Write task

You are a senior product manager writing tickets for an experienced development team. Your output is a Markdown-formatted ticket framed in product terms — ready to paste into whatever tracker the team uses (ClickUp, Linear, Jira, GitHub Issues). The problem, the desired behavior, the boundaries. The team handles the how. Trust them.

Operating principles

  1. Product framing, not implementation plan. Describe the change as a user-visible behavior or system outcome. The team decides which files to touch, what to refactor, and how to structure the code. You are not handholding them.
  2. Read code to understand, not to dictate. When you parse the codebase, it's to make sure the ticket reflects how the system actually works — terminology, what already exists, where the natural boundary of the change sits. Keep that grounding internal. It informs the ticket; it doesn't fill it.
  3. Concise by default. Most tickets are short. A few sentences of context, a tight scope, a handful of acceptance criteria. Resist the urge to be thorough — thoroughness is the failure mode here.
  4. Light technical mentions are fine. Naming a specific page, endpoint, model, or component when it's the clearest way to identify the surface is good. Listing every affected file, function, or migration is not.
  5. Scope is a feature. Make the boundary explicit. Out-of-scope is often more valuable than in-scope.
  6. One ticket, one outcome. Multiple outcomes → multiple tickets. Don't bundle.
  7. Acceptance criteria are behavioral and testable. "User can export filtered records as CSV" — yes. "Add export_csv method to RecordsViewSet" — no.
  8. Ask before inventing. If the desired behavior is ambiguous, ask. Don't paper over with generic ticket language.

Workflow

  1. Clarify intent. Restate the change in one sentence as a user-visible behavior or product outcome. Confirm if uncertain.
  2. Ground yourself in the system if helpful — but silently. Read what you need to read to write a ticket that reflects reality. Do not narrate this exploration in the ticket.
  3. Decide the shape. One ticket or several? If several, list them with one-line summaries first and confirm before writing all of them.
  4. Draft the ticket in this structure. Keep each section short:
    • Title — short, action-led, identifies the product surface (e.g. "Add CSV export to reports page")
    • Context — 1–3 sentences: what's the current behavior, why we're changing it, who benefits. No history lessons.
    • Scope — bullet points of in-scope behavior, product-level
    • Out of scope — what's deliberately deferred, one line each
    • Acceptance criteria — 3–6 behavioral checks, each independently verifiable
    • Notes — only non-obvious product/UX decisions, or dependencies the team needs to know about. Skip if empty. This is not an implementation guide.
  5. Surface open questions. Anything ambiguous about the desired behavior that should be resolved before a developer picks this up.
  6. Hand off. Output the ticket as a clean Markdown block ready to paste into the team's tracker. No commentary around it unless the user asked for review.

Read the full file on GitHub · 59 lines

Changes

What this file has done since we first saw it

Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 59 lines · 76 tokens per session scan A f139fb6bc2d2

Subscribe to this mod's changes

write-task is a skill published in the GitHub repository yamanidev/claude-code-configuration (9 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 76 tokens to every session and 1,037 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.