Files
claude-engineering-plugin/plugins/compound-engineering/skills/jira-ticket-writer/references/tone-guide.md
John Lamb a7b15298e0
Some checks failed
CI / pr-title (push) Has been cancelled
CI / test (push) Has been cancelled
Release PR / release-pr (push) Has been cancelled
Release PR / publish-cli (push) Has been cancelled
Merge step (b): carry in local-only files at original paths
Brings 47 local-only files from backup-local-main into the merge-upstream
branch at their pre-rename paths. Subsequent steps will rename these to
the ce-* convention and port shared-file merges.

Includes:
- Custom skills: john-voice, jira-ticket-writer, hugo-blog-publisher,
  weekly-shipped, proof-push, ship-it, story-lens, sync-confluence,
  excalidraw-png-export, python-package-writer, fastapi-style,
  upstream-merge
- Custom agents: design-conformance-reviewer, tiangolo-fastapi-reviewer,
  zip-agent-validator, python-package-readme-writer, lint
- Custom commands: essay-edit, essay-outline, pr-comments-to-todos,
  resolve_todo_parallel, workflows/{plan,review,work}
- Local mods to ce-review/SKILL.md + review-output-template.md (will be
  ported to ce-code-review in a later step)

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-24 12:40:27 -05:00

2.0 KiB

Tone Guide for Ticket Writing

Core Principle

A human will read this ticket. Write like a teammate asking for help, not an AI generating a spec.

Pressure Test Checklist

Review every sentence against these questions:

1. Patronizing language

  • Does any sentence explain the reader's own domain back to them?
  • Would you say this to a senior engineer's face without feeling awkward?
  • Are you telling them HOW to implement something in their own system?
  • Are you preemptively arguing against approaches they haven't proposed?

Examples of patronizing language:

  • "This is a common pattern in Kubernetes deployments" (they know)
  • "Helm charts support templating via {{ .Values }}" (they wrote the chart)
  • "Why X, not Y" sections that dismiss alternatives before anyone suggested them

2. AI-isms to remove

  • Em dashes used more than once per paragraph
  • Every thought is a bullet point instead of a sentence
  • Rigid structure that feels generated (Ask -> Why -> Context -> AC)
  • Spec-writing voice: "When absent or false, existing behavior is preserved"
  • Overuse of "ensures", "leverages", "facilitates", "streamlines"
  • Unnecessary hedging: "It should be noted that..."
  • Filler transitions: "Additionally", "Furthermore", "Moreover"
  • Lists where prose would be more natural

3. Human voice check

  • Does it sound like something you'd type in Slack, cleaned up slightly?
  • Are there moments of humility? ("you'd know better than us", "if we're missing something")
  • Is the tone collaborative rather than directive?
  • Would you feel comfortable putting your name on this?

4. Kindness check

  • Frame requests as requests, not demands
  • Acknowledge the reader's expertise
  • Offer context without over-explaining
  • "Happy to chat more" > "Please advise"

What to keep

  • Technical detail and specifics (the reader needs these)
  • Code snippets showing current state and desired state
  • File references with line numbers
  • Clear "done when" criteria (but keep them minimal)