Ticket templates

Ten pre-defined ticket formats covering features, bug fixes, code reviews, documentation, testing, research, security, performance, deployment, and refactoring work.

Updated

Pre-defined ticket templates for common work types.

Using These Templates

Each template includes:

  • Title: Suggested ticket title
  • Description: Detailed requirements
  • Assignee: Recommended employee role
  • Participants: Additional roles to include
  • Priority: Suggested priority level
  • Estimated Cost: Budget guidance
  • Dependencies: Common dependencies to consider

1. Feature Development

Title: Implement [Feature Name]

Description:

Implement [Feature Name] with the following requirements:

## User Stories
As a [user type], I want [action] so that [benefit].

## Functional Requirements
- [Requirement 1]
- [Requirement 2]
- [Requirement 3]

## Technical Requirements
- Language/Framework: [e.g., React, TypeScript]
- Dependencies: [List any dependencies]
- Integration points: [What this connects to]

## Acceptance Criteria
- [ ] [Criterion 1 — verifiable condition]
- [ ] [Criterion 2 — verifiable condition]
- [ ] [Criterion 3 — verifiable condition]

## Edge Cases to Handle
- [Edge case 1]
- [Edge case 2]
- [Edge case 3]

## Deliverables
- Production code
- Unit tests (>80% coverage)
- Documentation (JSDoc / docstrings)
- Update to [relevant docs]

## Constraints
- Time limit: [e.g., 4 hours]
- Budget: $[X.XX]
- Must not break: [existing features]

Assignee: Full Stack Engineer / Backend Engineer / Frontend Engineer Participants: Tech Lead, Designer (if UI involved), QA Engineer Priority: Normal / High / Critical Estimated Cost: $5-50 (depending on complexity) Dependencies: Design mockups, API contracts, architecture decision

2. Bug Fix

Title: Fix [Bug Description] in [Component/Area]

Description:

## Bug Report
**Summary:** [One-line description of bug]

**Steps to Reproduce:**
1. [Step 1]
2. [Step 2]
3. [Step 3]

**Expected Behavior:** [What should happen]

**Actual Behavior:** [What actually happens]

**Environment:**
- Browser/OS: [e.g., Chrome 122, Windows 11]
- Workspace: [Workspace name]
- Employee: [Who encountered it]

**Impact:** [Severity — Critical/High/Medium/Low]
- [Who is affected]
- [What functionality is broken]
- [Business impact]

## Fix Requirements
- Identify root cause
- Implement fix
- Add regression test
- Verify no regressions
- Document fix in code comments

## Deliverables
- Fixed code
- Regression test
- Root cause analysis (in comments)

## Constraints
- Must not break existing functionality
- Test in [affected environments]

Assignee: Full Stack Engineer / Backend Engineer / Frontend Engineer Participants: Tech Lead, QA Engineer Priority: High / Critical Estimated Cost: $2-20 Dependencies: None (usually urgent)

3. Code Review

Title: Review PR #[Number]: [PR Title]

Description:

## Pull Request Details
**PR Link:** [GitHub/GitLab URL]
**Author:** [Employee who created PR]
**Branches:** [source] → [destination]
**Lines changed:** [+XXX -YYY]

## Review Scope
- [ ] Code correctness and logic
- [ ] Architecture and design patterns
- [ ] Performance implications
- [ ] Security considerations
- [ ] Test coverage
- [ ] Documentation
- [ ] Naming and conventions

## Review Checklist
**Functionality:**
- [ ] Does the code do what it claims?
- [ ] Are edge cases handled?
- [ ] Is error handling appropriate?

**Code Quality:**
- [ ] Is code readable and maintainable?
- [ ] Are variable/function names clear?
- [ ] Is complexity reasonable?
- [ ] Are there appropriate comments?

**Tests:**
- [ ] Are tests comprehensive?
- [ ] Do tests pass?
- [ ] Are edge cases tested?

**Security:**
- [ ] No hardcoded secrets?
- [ ] Input validation present?
- [ ] SQL injection / XSS protection?
- [ ] Authentication/authorization correct?

**Performance:**
- [ ] Any obvious performance issues?
- [ ] Database queries optimized?
- [ ] Caching considered?

## Review Outcome
- [ ] Approve
- [ ] Approve with suggestions
- [ ] Request changes

## Comments
[List specific feedback with line numbers]

Assignee: Tech Lead / Senior Engineer Participants: PR Author (for clarification) Priority: Normal Estimated Cost: $1-10 Dependencies: PR must be created first

4. Documentation

Title: Document [Feature/Component/API]

Description:

## Documentation Requirements
Create comprehensive documentation for [subject].

## Target Audience
- [Primary audience — e.g., API users, end users, developers]
- [Secondary audience — e.g., maintainers, integrators]

## Required Sections

### Overview
- What is [subject]?
- Why does it exist?
- When should it be used?

### Getting Started
- Quick start example
- Minimal working example
- Prerequisites

### Reference
- API reference (if applicable)
- Configuration options
- Parameters and return values

### Examples
- Common use cases (3-5 examples)
- Advanced usage
- Edge cases

### Troubleshooting
- Common issues
- Error messages
- Solutions

## Format
- [ ] Markdown (.md)
- [ ] Inline code examples
- [ ] Syntax highlighting
- [ ] Diagrams (if helpful — Mermaid, ASCII)

## Deliverables
- Documentation file(s)
- Update to table of contents (if applicable)
- Review for accuracy and completeness

## Reviewers
- [ ] Technical accuracy: [Name]
- [ ] User perspective: [Name]
- [ ] Editorial review: [Name]

Assignee: Technical Writer / Senior Engineer Participants: Subject matter expert(s) Priority: Normal Estimated Cost: $3-15 Dependencies: Feature must be complete and stable

5. Testing

Title: Test Coverage for [Component/Feature]

Description:

## Testing Requirements
Create comprehensive tests for [subject].

## Test Types Required
- [ ] Unit tests (functions, components)
- [ ] Integration tests (interactions)
- [ ] E2E tests (user flows)
- [ ] Performance tests (if applicable)

## Test Coverage Target
- Minimum: 80% code coverage
- Target: 90%+ code coverage
- Critical paths: 100% coverage

## Test Cases to Cover

### Happy Path
- [ ] [Scenario 1 — normal usage]
- [ ] [Scenario 2 — typical workflow]

### Edge Cases
- [ ] [Edge case 1 — empty input]
- [ ] [Edge case 2 — boundary conditions]
- [ ] [Edge case 3 — null/undefined]

### Error Handling
- [ ] [Error scenario 1]
- [ ] [Error scenario 2]

### Performance
- [ ] [Performance scenario 1 — large dataset]
- [ ] [Performance scenario 2 — concurrent load]

## Test Framework
- [ ] Specify framework (Jest, pytest, etc.)
- [ ] Mocking strategy
- [ ] Test data fixtures

## Deliverables
- Test file(s)
- Test report (coverage %)
- Documentation of test approach

## Constraints
- Tests must pass before merge
- No flaky tests
- Fast execution (< 5 min total)

Assignee: QA Engineer / Developer Participants: Developer (for implementation context) Priority: High Estimated Cost: $3-20 Dependencies: Feature implementation complete

6. Research / Investigation

Title: Research: [Topic/Question]

Description:

## Research Objective
[What we need to learn or decide]

## Research Questions
1. [Question 1]
2. [Question 2]
3. [Question 3]

## Research Areas
- [Technology comparison — e.g., React vs Vue]
- [Architecture options — e.g., SQL vs NoSQL]
- [Best practices — e.g., authentication patterns]
- [Tool evaluation — e.g., testing frameworks]

## Required Output
- [ ] Executive summary (1-2 paragraphs)
- [ ] Comparison table (if evaluating options)
- [ ] Recommendation with rationale
- [ ] Implementation considerations
- [ ] Risks and mitigations

## Sources to Consult
- [Official documentation]
- [Benchmark studies]
- [Community discussions (GitHub, Stack Overflow)]
- [Industry best practices]

## Deliverables
- Research document (Markdown)
- Presentation slides (if team review needed)
- Recommendation summary

## Success Criteria
- [ ] Recommendation is actionable
- [ ] Trade-offs are clear
- [ ] Implementation path is defined
- [ ] Stakeholder questions anticipated

Assignee: Tech Lead / Senior Engineer / Product Manager Participants: Stakeholders Priority: Normal Estimated Cost: $5-25 Dependencies: Clear research scope

7. Security Review

Title: Security Review: [Component/System]

Description:

## Security Review Scope
[Component/system being reviewed]

## Review Checklist

### Authentication & Authorization
- [ ] Auth flows secure?
- [ ] Authorization checks on all endpoints?
- [ ] Session management correct?
- [ ] Password requirements adequate?

### Input Validation
- [ ] All user inputs validated?
- [ ] SQL injection prevented?
- [ ] XSS prevented?
- [ ] CSRF protection present?

### Data Protection
- [ ] Sensitive data encrypted at rest?
- [ ] Sensitive data encrypted in transit?
- [ ] No sensitive data in logs?
- [ ] Secrets managed properly?

### API Security
- [ ] Rate limiting configured?
- [ ] API authentication secure?
- [ ] Input sanitization on all endpoints?
- [ ] Error messages don't leak info?

### Dependencies
- [ ] Dependencies up to date?
- [ ] No known vulnerabilities (npm audit, etc.)?
- [ ] Dependency pinning in place?

## Review Process
1. Automated scan (if available)
2. Manual review against checklist
3. Threat modeling
4. Penetration testing (if critical)

## Deliverables
- Security review document
- Vulnerability report (if any found)
- Remediation plan (if vulnerabilities found)
- Re-review date

## Severity Levels
- **Critical:** Fix immediately (security risk)
- **High:** Fix within 1 week
- **Medium:** Fix within 1 month
- **Low:** Fix in next cycle

Assignee: Security Engineer / Senior Engineer Participants: Tech Lead, DevOps Priority: High / Critical Estimated Cost: $5-30 Dependencies: Feature complete

8. Performance Optimization

Title: Optimize [Component/Query/Process]

Description:

## Performance Issue
**Current State:** [Describe slow performance]
**Target:** [Specific improvement goal]

## Performance Metrics
- Current: [e.g., 3.2s load time, 1500ms query]
- Target: [e.g., <1s load time, <200ms query]
- Measurement: [How we're measuring]

## Investigation Areas
- [ ] Algorithm complexity
- [ ] Database query optimization
- [ ] Caching strategy
- [ ] Bundle size (if frontend)
- [ ] Network requests
- [ ] Memory leaks

## Optimization Strategies
1. [Strategy 1 — e.g., Add database index]
2. [Strategy 2 — e.g., Implement caching]
3. [Strategy 3 — e.g., Lazy loading]

## Testing Approach
- [ ] Benchmark before optimization
- [ ] Apply optimization
- [ ] Benchmark after optimization
- [ ] Verify no regressions

## Deliverables
- Optimized code
- Performance comparison (before/after)
- Documentation of changes
- Monitoring setup (if applicable)

## Constraints
- Must maintain functionality
- Must not introduce new bugs
- Must be maintainable

Assignee: Performance Engineer / Senior Engineer Participants: Tech Lead Priority: High Estimated Cost: $5-40 Dependencies: Performance baseline established

9. Deployment

Title: Deploy [Feature/Version] to [Environment]

Description:

## Deployment Details
**Version:** [Version number]
**Environment:** [Staging / Production]
**Type:** [Full release / Hotfix / Rollback]

## Pre-Deployment Checklist
- [ ] All tests passing
- [ ] Code reviewed
- [ ] Documentation updated
- [ ] Database migrations prepared
- [ ] Rollback plan documented
- [ ] Stakeholders notified
- [ ] Maintenance window scheduled (if needed)

## Deployment Steps
1. [Step 1 — e.g., Run database migrations]
2. [Step 2 — e.g., Deploy application]
3. [Step 3 — e.g., Run smoke tests]
4. [Step 4 — e.g., Verify monitoring]

## Verification
- [ ] Smoke tests pass
- [ ] Key user flows working
- [ ] No errors in logs
- [ ] Performance acceptable

## Rollback Plan
**Trigger:** [What conditions trigger rollback]
**Steps:**
1. [Rollback step 1]
2. [Rollback step 2]
3. [Rollback step 3]

## Post-Deployment
- [ ] Monitor for [X] hours
- [ ] Check logs periodically
- [ ] Gather user feedback
- [ ] Document any issues

## Deliverables
- Deployed software
- Deployment log
- Incident report (if issues arise)

Assignee: DevOps Engineer / Tech Lead Participants: QA Engineer, Stakeholders Priority: High / Critical Estimated Cost: $2-15 Dependencies: All development complete, tests passing

10. Refactoring

Title: Refactor [Component/Module]

Description:

## Refactoring Objective
**Current State:** [Describe technical debt or issue]
**Goal:** [What we want to achieve]

## Reasons for Refactoring
- [ ] Code is difficult to maintain
- [ ] Performance issues
- [ ] Design patterns not followed
- [ ] Duplication to eliminate
- [ ] Dependencies to decouple

## Refactoring Scope
**Files/Modules affected:**
- [File/Module 1]
- [File/Module 2]
- [File/Module 3]

## Refactoring Approach
1. [Step 1 — e.g., Extract common logic]
2. [Step 2 — e.g., Introduce design pattern]
3. [Step 3 — e.g., Update tests]

## Constraints
- [ ] Must maintain existing functionality
- [ ] All tests must pass
- [ ] No breaking changes to APIs
- [ ] Performance must not degrade

## Testing
- [ ] All existing tests pass
- [ ] Add tests for new structure
- [ ] Manual testing of affected areas
- [ ] Compare before/after behavior

## Deliverables
- Refactored code
- Updated tests
- Refactoring documentation
- Migration guide (if API changes)

Assignee: Senior Engineer / Tech Lead Participants: QA Engineer Priority: Normal Estimated Cost: $5-30 Dependencies: Comprehensive test coverage required first

Tips for Using Templates

  1. Customize for context: Modify templates to fit your specific needs
  2. Be specific: Replace placeholders with concrete details
  3. Set clear acceptance criteria: Define what “done” looks like
  4. Include relevant context: Link to related tickets, docs, or discussions
  5. Adjust budgets: Estimated costs are guidelines, adjust based on complexity

Need more examples? See scenarios/ for real-world ticket examples.