| name | decomposing-tasks |
| description | Use when you have a complete feature spec and need to plan implementation - analyzes task dependencies, groups into sequential/parallel phases, validates task quality (no XL tasks, explicit files), and calculates parallelization time savings |
Task Decomposition
Analyze a feature specification and decompose it into an execution-ready plan with automatic phase grouping based on file dependencies.
When to use: After completing a feature spec, before implementation.
Announce: "I'm using the Task Decomposition skill to create an execution plan."
Overview
This skill transforms a feature specification into a structured implementation plan by:
- Extracting tasks from spec
- Analyzing file dependencies between tasks
- Grouping into phases (sequential or parallel)
- Validating task quality
- Outputting executable plan.md
PR-Sized Chunks Philosophy
Tasks should be PR-sized, thematically coherent units - not mechanical file-by-file splits.
Think like a senior engineer:
- ❌ "Add schema" + "Install dependency" + "Add routes" (3 tiny tasks)
- ✅ "Database Foundation" (schema + migration + dependencies as one unit)
Task chunking principles:
Thematic Coherence - Task represents a complete "thing"
- Complete subsystem (agent system with tools + config + types)
- Complete layer (all service methods for a feature)
- Complete feature slice (UI flow from form to preview to confirm)
Natural PR Size - Reviewable in one sitting (4-7h)
- M (3-5h): Sweet spot for most tasks
- L (5-7h): Complex but coherent units (full UI layer, complete API surface)
- S (1-2h): Rare - only for truly standalone work
Logical Boundaries - Clear separation points
- Layer boundaries (Models, Services, Actions, UI)
- Subsystem boundaries (Agent, Import Service, API)
- Feature boundaries (Auth, Import, Dashboard)
Stackable - Dependencies flow cleanly
- Database → Logic → API → UI
- Foundation → Core → Integration
Good chunking examples:
✅ GOOD: PR-sized, thematic chunks
- Task 1: Database Foundation (M - 4h)
- Schema changes + migration + dependency install
- One coherent "foundation" PR
- Task 2: Agent System (L - 6h)
- Agent config + tools + schemas + types
- Complete agent subsystem as a unit
- Task 3: Import Service Layer (M - 4h)
- All service methods + business logic
- Clean layer boundary
- Task 4: API Surface (L - 6h)
- Server actions + SSE route
- Complete API interface
- Task 5: Import UI (L - 7h)
- All components + page + integration
- Complete user-facing feature
Total: 5 tasks, 27h
Each task is a reviewable PR that adds value
❌ BAD: Too granular, mechanical splits
- Task 1: Add schema fields (S - 2h)
- Task 2: Create migration (S - 1h)
- Task 3: Install dependency (S - 1h)
- Task 4: Create agent config (M - 3h)
- Task 5: Create fetch tool (S - 1h)
- Task 6: Create schemas (S - 2h)
- Task 7: Create service (M - 4h)
- Task 8: Create actions (M - 3h)
- Task 9: Create SSE route (M - 3h)
- Task 10: Create form component (S - 2h)
- Task 11: Create progress component (S - 2h)
- Task 12: Create preview component (M - 2h)
- Task 13: Add routes (S - 1h)
- Task 14: Integrate components (S - 1h)
Total: 14 tasks, 28h
Too many tiny PRs, no coherent units
Bundling heuristics:
If you're creating S tasks, ask:
- Can this bundle with a related M task?
- Does this complete a subsystem or layer?
- Would a senior engineer create a separate PR for this?
Common bundling patterns:
- Schema + migration + dependencies → "Database Foundation"
- Agent + tools + schemas → "Agent System"
- Service + helper functions → "Service Layer"
- Actions + API routes → "API Layer"
- All UI components for a flow → "UI Layer"
The Process
Step 1: Read Spec and Design Chunks
Read the spec file and extract all tasks from the "Implementation Plan" section.
For each task, capture:
- Task ID (from heading)
- Description (what to implement)
- Files (explicit paths from spec)
- Complexity (S/M/L/XL - estimated hours)
- Acceptance Criteria (checklist items)
- Implementation Steps (detailed steps)
Example extraction:
Spec has:
### Task 1: Database Schema
**Complexity**: M (2-4h)
**Files**:
- prisma/schema.prisma
- prisma/migrations/
**Description**: Add VerificationToken model for Auth.js...
**Acceptance**:
- [ ] Model matches Auth.js spec
- [ ] Migration runs cleanly
Extract to:
{
id: "task-1-database-schema",
description: "Add VerificationToken model",
files: ["prisma/schema.prisma", "prisma/migrations/"],
complexity: "M",
estimated_hours: 3,
acceptance_criteria: [...],
steps: [...]
}
Step 2: Validate Task Quality & Chunking
For each task, check for quality issues:
CRITICAL (must fix):
- ❌ XL complexity (>8h) → Must split into M/L tasks
- ❌ No files specified → Must add explicit file paths
- ❌ No acceptance criteria → Must add 3-5 testable criteria
- ❌ Wildcard patterns (
src/**/*.ts) → Must use explicit paths - ❌ Too many S tasks (>30% of total) → Bundle into thematic M/L tasks
HIGH (strongly recommend):
- ⚠️ Standalone S task that could bundle with related work
- ⚠️ L complexity (5-8h) → Verify it's a coherent unit, not arbitrary split
- ⚠️ >10 files → Likely too large, consider splitting by subsystem
- ⚠️ <50 char description → Add more detail about what subsystem/layer this completes
- ⚠️ <3 acceptance criteria → Add more specific criteria
Chunking validation:
If task is S (1-2h), verify it's truly standalone:
- Can't be bundled with schema/migration/dependencies?
- Can't be bundled with related service/action/component?
- Would a senior engineer create a separate PR for this?
If >50% of tasks are S, that's a red flag:
- Likely too granular
- Missing thematic coherence
- Bundle related S tasks into M tasks
If CRITICAL issues found:
- STOP and report issues to user
- User must update spec or adjust chunking
- Re-run skill after fixes
If only HIGH issues:
- Report warnings
- Offer to continue or fix
Step 3: Analyze File Dependencies
Build dependency graph by analyzing file overlaps:
Algorithm:
For each task T1:
For each task T2 (where T2 appears after T1):
shared_files = intersection(T1.files, T2.files)
If shared_files is not empty:
T2.dependencies.add(T1.id)
T2.dependency_reason = "Shares files: {shared_files}"
Example:
Task 1: ["prisma/schema.prisma"]
Task 2: ["src/lib/models/auth.ts"]
Task 3: ["prisma/schema.prisma", "src/types/auth.ts"]
Analysis:
- Task 2: No dependencies (no shared files with Task 1)
- Task 3: Depends on Task 1 (shares prisma/schema.prisma)
Architectural dependencies: Also add dependencies based on layer order:
- Models → Services → Actions → UI
- Database → Types → Logic → API → Components
Step 4: Group into Phases
Group tasks into phases using dependency graph:
Phase grouping algorithm:
1. Start with tasks that have no dependencies (roots)
2. Group all independent roots into Phase 1
3. Remove roots from graph
4. Repeat until all tasks grouped
For each phase:
- If all tasks independent: strategy = "parallel"
- If any dependencies exist: strategy = "sequential"
Example:
Tasks:
- Task 1: [] (no deps)
- Task 2: [] (no deps)
- Task 3: [task-1, task-2]
- Task 4: [task-3]
Grouping:
Phase 1: [Task 1, Task 2] - parallel (independent)
Phase 2: [Task 3] - sequential (waits for Phase 1)
Phase 3: [Task 4] - sequential (waits for Phase 2)
Step 5: Calculate Execution Estimates
For each phase, calculate:
- Sequential time: Sum of all task hours
- Parallel time: Max of all task hours (if parallel strategy)
- Time savings: Sequential - Parallel
Example:
Phase 2 (parallel):
- Task A: 3h
- Task B: 2h
- Task C: 4h
Sequential: 3 + 2 + 4 = 9h
Parallel: max(3, 2, 4) = 4h
Savings: 9 - 4 = 5h (56% faster)
Step 6: Generate plan.md
Write plan to {spec-directory}/plan.md:
Template:
# Feature: {Feature Name} - Implementation Plan
> **Generated by:** Task Decomposition skill
> **From spec:** {spec-path}
> **Created:** {date}
## Execution Summary
- **Total Tasks**: {count}
- **Total Phases**: {count}
- **Sequential Time**: {hours}h
- **Parallel Time**: {hours}h
- **Time Savings**: {hours}h ({percent}%)
**Parallel Opportunities:**
- Phase {id}: {task-count} tasks ({hours}h saved)
---
## Phase {N}: {Phase Name}
**Strategy**: {sequential|parallel}
**Reason**: {why this strategy}
### Task {ID}: {Name}
**Files**:
- {file-path-1}
- {file-path-2}
**Complexity**: {S|M|L} ({hours}h)
**Dependencies**: {[task-ids] or "None"}
**Description**:
{What to implement and why}
**Implementation Steps**:
1. {step-1}
2. {step-2}
3. {step-3}
**Acceptance Criteria**:
- [ ] {criterion-1}
- [ ] {criterion-2}
- [ ] {criterion-3}
**Mandatory Patterns**:
> **Constitution**: All code must follow @docs/constitutions/current/
See architecture.md for layer boundaries and patterns.md for required patterns.
**TDD**: Follow `test-driven-development` skill (write test first, watch fail, minimal code, watch pass)
**Quality Gates**:
```bash
pnpm biome check --write .
pnpm test {test-files}
```
{Repeat for all tasks in all phases}
### Step 7: Report to User
After generating plan:
```markdown
✅ Task Decomposition Complete
**Plan Location**: specs/{run-id}-{feature-slug}/plan.md
## Breakdown
- Phases: {count}
- Tasks: {count}
- Complexity: {XL}: {n}, {L}: {n}, {M}: {n}, {S}: {n}
## Execution Strategy
- Sequential Phases: {count} ({tasks} tasks)
- Parallel Phases: {count} ({tasks} tasks)
## Time Estimates
- Sequential Execution: {hours}h
- With Parallelization: {hours}h
- **Time Savings: {hours}h ({percent}% faster)**
## Next Steps
Review plan:
```bash
cat specs/{run-id}-{feature-slug}/plan.md
Execute plan:
/spectacular:execute @specs/{run-id}-{feature-slug}/plan.md
## Quality Rules
**Task Sizing (PR-focused):**
- ⚠️ S (1-2h): Rare - only truly standalone work (e.g., config-only changes)
- Most S tasks should bundle into M
- Ask: "Would a senior engineer PR this alone?"
- ✅ M (3-5h): Sweet spot - most tasks should be this size
- Complete subsystem, layer, or feature slice
- Reviewable in one sitting
- Thematically coherent unit
- ✅ L (5-7h): Complex coherent units (use for major subsystems)
- Full UI layer with all components
- Complete API surface (actions + routes)
- Major feature integration
- ❌ XL (>8h): NEVER - always split into M/L tasks
**Chunking Standards:**
- ❌ <30% S tasks is a red flag (too granular)
- ✅ Most tasks should be M (60-80%)
- ✅ Some L tasks for major units (10-30%)
- ✅ Rare S tasks for truly standalone work (<10%)
**File Specificity:**
- ✅ `src/lib/models/auth.ts`
- ✅ `src/components/auth/LoginForm.tsx`
- ❌ `src/**/*.ts` (too vague)
- ❌ `src/lib/models/` (specify exact files)
**Acceptance Criteria:**
- ✅ 3-5 specific, testable criteria
- ✅ Quantifiable (tests pass, build succeeds, API returns 200)
- ❌ Vague ("works well", "is good")
- ❌ Too many (>7 - task is too large)
**Dependencies:**
- ✅ Minimal (only true blockers)
- ✅ Explicit reasons (shares file X)
- ❌ Circular dependencies
- ❌ Over-constrained (everything depends on everything)
## Error Handling
### Spec Has No Tasks
If spec doesn't have "Implementation Plan" section:
❌ Cannot decompose - spec has no tasks
The spec must have an "Implementation Plan" section with tasks.
Use /spec-feature to generate a complete spec first.
### Critical Quality Issues
If tasks have critical issues:
❌ Task Quality Issues - Cannot Generate Plan
Critical Issues Found:
- Task 3: XL complexity (12h) - must split
- Task 5: No files specified
- Task 7: No acceptance criteria
Fix these issues in the spec, then re-run: /spectacular:plan @specs/{run-id}-{feature-slug}/spec.md
### Circular Dependencies
If dependency graph has cycles:
❌ Circular Dependencies Detected
Task A depends on Task B Task B depends on Task C Task C depends on Task A
This is impossible to execute. Review task organization.
## Integration with Other Skills
**Before:** Use `brainstorming` and `spec-feature` to create complete spec
**After:** Use `/execute` command to run plan with `subagent-driven-development`
**Pairs with:**
- `subagent-driven-development` - Executes individual tasks
- `finishing-a-development-branch` - Completes implementation
## Project-Specific Configuration
For projects with a constitution, reference it in every task:
> **Constitution**: All tasks MUST follow @docs/constitutions/current/
Every task must include:
- Reference to constitution for architecture (layer boundaries, dependencies)
- Reference to constitution for patterns (validation, state management, etc.)
- Quality gates (linting, testing, building)
**Quality gates:**
```bash
pnpm biome check --write .
pnpm test