Accepting a plausible assumption
Check names, dates, source material, and requirements. A convincing proposal still needs a reviewer who knows the work.
Headquarters / Guides
Use AI to draft a ticket you can stand behind.
Write clearer Kooya tickets with optional AI guidance, careful proposal review, verifiable acceptance criteria, and explicit application.
By Kooya editorial team · Updated
Objective and preparation
Produce a ticket with a clear outcome, bounded scope, and acceptance criteria a reviewer can verify. Use AI task improvement as a proposal stage, then apply human judgment before saving the reviewed version.
Start with an existing ticket and the context your team has agreed. Confirm ticket editing access and availability of the organization’s configured AI service. Collect relevant references and identify questions that still need a decision.
Step-by-step workflow
1. Establish the real outcome
Write the task’s purpose and known constraints in the original ticket. Include evidence or reference material the proposal should use. Separate agreed facts from questions that remain open.
2. Request a focused proposal
Open Improve Task and add optional guidance. For example, ask for measurable verification and clearer handoff steps while preserving the approved scope. Generate the preview.
3. Review the content and metadata
Read the assessment and proposed changes. Check the description, task type, priority, assignees, dates, and criteria against the actual agreement. Review documents, media, and sources where included.
4. Resolve assumptions and edit
Correct unsupported claims and ambiguous criteria. Review change reasons and open questions with the responsible people. Make each criterion observable before treating the ticket as ready.
5. Apply and verify the saved ticket
Apply the reviewed version explicitly, then inspect the saved result. If another edit has changed the ticket since the preview, refresh and regenerate a proposal before applying it. Share the final task with its owner and reviewer.
Worked example
The illustrative starting ticket says “Fix onboarding docs.” The author adds guidance to clarify the support handoff. The reviewer narrows the outcome to “Update the setup instructions and escalation contact,” verifies the referenced policy, and writes criteria for tested links and a reviewer-approved sequence.
Original ticket
An initial task with known context and constraints.
AI proposal
Suggested content, metadata, reasons, and open questions.
Human review
Check the facts, narrow scope, and edit the proposal.
Explicit apply
Save the reviewed ticket and verify its final content.
This is an editorial example showing the review process. It is not a captured provider response. A preview leaves the original saved ticket unchanged until the reviewer applies the changes.
Common mistakes
Reviewing only the description
Inspect metadata, criteria, documents, and media as well as the prose. A changed assignee or date can alter the working agreement.
Leaving criteria untestable
Replace “make it better” with a result someone can observe, such as tested links and an approved setup sequence. Resolve remaining open questions before applying.
Headquarters by Kooya
Explore your company workspace.
Discover how projects, people, and cost visibility come together in Headquarters.