Review: ticket-orchestrator-routing

1. Result: approve

Approve. I found no blockers.

2. Summary

The new ticket-orchestrator-routing workflow satisfies the ticket scope as a workflow/resource change. It defines Orchestrator-owned routing responsibilities, keeps routing authority tied to Ticket records plus explicitly inspected repository/Pod state, and avoids introducing scheduler, lease, queue, dashboard, automatic spawning, or arbitrary filesystem-write behavior.

The implementation fits the current multi-agent direction: routing produces a recorded decision and, for implementation-ready Tickets, an IntentPacket that is handed to multi-agent-workflow rather than directly spawning coder Pods.

3. Requirement assessment

Ticket terminology: Pass. The new workflow and docs use Ticket terminology and do not revive WorkItem / old-system wording.
Orchestrator responsibilities: Pass. The workflow requires reading the Ticket body/thread/artifacts/status, inspecting relevant repository state and visible Pod state, classifying the next action, recording a routing decision through TicketComment, and creating an IntentPacket only for implementation-ready Tickets.
Non-goals: Pass. The workflow explicitly excludes unattended scheduling, automatic Pod spawning, lease/queue persistence, TUI dashboard/action dashboard behavior, TicketUpdate mutation, external tracker integration, and arbitrary filesystem writes.
Routing classifications: Pass. The workflow covers requirements_sync_needed, preflight_needed, spike_needed, implementation_ready, review_needed, blocked_action_required, close_ready, defer_pending, and closed_or_noop.
Conditions and actions: Pass. Each classification has usable conditions and required next actions, including when to route back to intake/preflight, when to request spike work, when to review, when to block for human action, and when close/no-op is appropriate.
Preflight gate: Pass. Preflight-needed Tickets are explicitly prohibited from going directly to coder Pods.
Implementation-ready handoff: Pass. The implementation-ready path requires an IntentPacket and explicitly connects to multi-agent-workflow / worktree-based implementation.
Decision recording: Pass. The TicketComment decision format is concrete and includes classification, evidence, inspected state, next workflow, blocking questions, and optional IntentPacket content.
Authority model: Pass. The workflow bases routing on Ticket fields/events/artifacts plus explicitly inspected repository/Pod state, and rejects hidden conversation state as routing authority.
Docs update: Pass. docs/development/workflows.md is small and accurately describes where the routing workflow fits among intake, preflight, worktree, multi-agent, and close/review flows.
Code scope: Pass. No source-code change is needed for this ticket scope.

4. Blockers

None.

5. Non-blockers / follow-ups

None required for this ticket.

A future follow-up may be useful after the workflow is exercised: if repeated routing decisions stabilize, extract a pure classifier/test fixture. That is explicitly outside this ticket and should not block approval.

6. Validation assessed

Read and assessed the Ticket record at work-items/open/20260605-040104-ticket-orchestrator-routing/item.md.
Read and assessed the new workflow at .yoi/workflow/ticket-orchestrator-routing.md.
Read and assessed the docs update at docs/development/workflows.md.
Cross-checked related workflow boundaries against:
- .yoi/workflow/ticket-intake-workflow.md
- .yoi/workflow/ticket-preflight-workflow.md
- .yoi/workflow/multi-agent-workflow.md
Checked repository status/diff shape sufficiently to confirm this review concerns workflow/docs/ticket material and does not require code validation.
Did not run nix build .#yoi because this is a docs/workflow-only review with no code, packaging, runtime-resource, or prompt changes requiring a package build.

7. Residual risk

The main residual risk is operational, not a blocker: the workflow depends on Orchestrator discipline to record decisions and inspect state explicitly until any future classifier/tooling support exists. The written workflow is clear enough for that current manual/orchestrated use.

4.3 KiB Raw Blame History