To Backlog

Invoking this skill is the owner's standing approval for the full planning transaction set of the standalone work items confirmed in this conversation — intake, refinement, rank placement, every proposed -> ready transition — superseding $backlog's per-transaction pauses for exactly these transactions; follow $backlog for everything else. It additionally authorizes $guidance publication for the subjects the owner names at step 2, and nothing else in docs/wiki. It never authorizes Epic creation, cancellation, other wiki mutation, execution claims, or records outside these items.

Pause only at the evidence decision (step 2), a $guidance rule-replacement pause, and hard blockers; otherwise run to completion and report. Only $to-product's contract covers the rule-replacement pause — never otherwise suppress it. User-invoked only — or by $to-product, whose autonomous contract auto-answers every pause.

When at least two items or planning concerns are independent, invoke $parallel-execution for read-only analysis of decomposition, dependencies, risks, acceptance, and verification. This context synthesizes the plan and serializes every evidence decision and $backlog mutation.

Workflow

1. Item intake — Enumerate the desired changes the user explicitly confirmed in this conversation and create each as the smallest coherent, independently valuable Story, Task, or Bug with parent: none, relationships, blockers, and provenance via $backlog intake. If the changes are coherent parts of one coordinated outcome that should form an Epic, stop and recommend $to-epic instead — never manufacture sibling fragments of a hidden Epic. If the user names existing proposed standalone records, resume each at its first incomplete step; reject ready, in-progress, or terminal records. Rank placement: the user's stated position, else append in dependency order at the end of the global rank.
2. Evidence decision — Before refinement, inventory the technologies and standards the items implicate, using $research's delta-scoped subject rule — never a whole-stack survey. Apply $research step 2's concept triggers; name each implicated standard subject or record why none applies — an empty standards half without a recorded reason is invalid. Report each subject's page state under docs/wiki/engineering/: missing, draft, version-mismatched against the manifest, stale per $research's thresholds, or current. Then ask the owner one question covering both: run $guidance for which of those subjects, and run $research for which items? Never skip or answer either half yourself, unless $to-product's autonomous contract answers it.
   • $guidance → naming a subject is the decision to run $guidance for it now, before refinement — deferring it to implementation or acceptance is not an outcome. Run it for the named subjects only, under this invocation's approval; $research's no-wiki-during-planning rule does not apply to $guidance pages.
   • $research yes → run it per named item after guidance; use the findings in refinement.
   • $research no → record the decision on each item. If a version-specific or security-sensitive question surfaces later, ask again for that record — never relabel uncertainty.
3. Refine to ready — For each item in rank order: refine against its type template and accepted wiki state; resolve research (complete from a run, not-needed only with inspecting evidence); resolve decisions per $backlog's Definition of Ready, reading existing ADRs first and naming any one a draft would supersede — decisions: none only when the significance test records no qualifying decision; every decision confirmed in discussion or named in the record body becomes decisions: draft with an ADR-shaped draft under ## Decisions, never deferred in prose; fill ## Execution with approach and verification commands, citing this invocation as the recorded approval; verify the full Definition of Ready; transition to ready. Never allocate or publish an ADR here — publication happens at acceptance.
4. Report — Item IDs with type, status, rank position, research state, and decisions state with each drafted decision named; the evidence decision, every guidance page created or refreshed, and every rule-replacement pause with its outcome; commit hashes; the final node scripts/validate-project.mjs result. Any record left proposed gets its named blocker and resumption point.

A failed validator, unresolved research the owner declined, or a missing readiness requirement is a blocker: leave the record proposed, keep committed transactions intact, and report — never force ready.