linear-prism
Decompose requirements into implementation-ready tasks and register them in Linear — through interactive dialog, with dependency graphs and Design Doc boundaries.
Why
Task decomposition is the bottleneck in agentic development. Get the boundaries wrong and every downstream agent — design, implementation, review — works against a flawed plan. The damage compounds silently because each agent operates in its own context.
Common failure modes:
- Vague input goes unquestioned — the tool guesses instead of asking, producing tasks that look reasonable but miss critical boundaries
- Granularity is inconsistent — some tasks are too large to design in one pass, others are too small to verify independently
- Dependencies stay implicit — teams discover blocking relationships during implementation, not during planning
- Decisions made in conversation are lost — the person who broke down the work remembers the trade-offs, but the issue tracker doesn't
linear-prism addresses these by running an interactive quality gate before decomposition, structuring each task with explicit assumptions, key decisions, and Design Doc boundaries, and registering everything in Linear where progress is visible to the whole team.
What It Looks Like
Input: A one-line Linear issue — "Improve image generation performance"
Quality Gate:
Objective clarity: pass
Service scope: pass (inferred from codebase)
Testability: fail — no measurable target
Completeness: fail — cache strategy undefined
→ Blocks decomposition. Asks:
1. What is your latency target?
2. Cache prompt results, generated images, or both?
3. In-memory only, or persistent across restarts?
After dialog, produces 5 tasks with dependency graph:
T1 [shared_prerequisite] — Pipeline timing instrumentation
T2 [shared_prerequisite] — Generic in-memory cache
T3 [value_unit] — Prompt enhancement cache (depends: T2)
T4 [value_unit] — Generated image cache (depends: T2)
T5 [value_unit] — Cache config via env vars (depends: T2)
Each issue in Linear includes the goal, affected services, Design Doc scope, assumptions, and key decisions from the dialog — so the person (or agent) picking up the task has the full context.
Input: A detailed PRD with P0/P1 priorities
Quality Gate: all pass + 4 clarification questions about shared components
→ Hybrid strategy: extract shared batch execution engine,
then vertical slice per feature
T1 [shared_prerequisite] — Batch types + execution engine
T2 [value_unit] — batch_generate tool (depends: T1)
T3 [value_unit] — Progress reporting (depends: T1, T2)
T4 [value_unit] — batch_edit tool (depends: T1)
Prerequisites
Quick Start
Claude Code
claude
# Inside Claude Code:
/plugin marketplace add shinpr/linear-prism
/plugin install linear-prism@linear-prism
# Restart session, then:
/linear-prism:recipe-decompose https://linear.app/team/issue/ENG-123
/linear-prism:recipe-decompose docs/prd.md
Codex CLI
cd your-project
npx linear-prism install
codex mcp login linear
Then in Codex:
$recipe-decompose https://linear.app/team/issue/ENG-123
$recipe-decompose docs/prd.md
How It Works
Input (Linear issue URL or PRD file)
│
Round 1: Quality Gate
├── Fetch and analyze requirements
├── Assess: objective clarity, service scope, testability, completeness
└── Block → ask specific questions, or proceed with clarifications
│
Round 2: Decomposition
├── Select slicing strategy (vertical / horizontal / hybrid)
│ based on feature independence and shared dependency count
├── Extract shared prerequisites
├── Produce typed tasks with Design Doc boundaries per service
├── Build dependency graph and coverage map
└── User review: approve / adjust / redo (nothing registers without approval)
│
Round 3: Registration
├── Create parent issue (PRD input) or use source issue (Linear input)
├── Register sub-issues with blocking relations
└── Fallback: Markdown drafts if Linear MCP unavailable
Task Types
