Posted this in another community but want to hear from developers too:
I manage a small development team and we keep running into the same annoying issue. Our task tickets in our project management system are garbage. Most of them are missing important details, the requirements are unclear, and whenever someone tries to work on a ticket later, they have to figure everything out again from the beginning.
I know we should just write better documentation, but honestly most programmers hate writing detailed specs and long descriptions for tasks.
The main problems I keep seeing:
• New team members waste tons of time trying to understand what each task actually needs
• Working on related components becomes a nightmare because there is no context
• Even I don’t completely know how every part of our codebase works
I have been thinking about a solution for this. Maybe something that could automatically capture information from our daily meetings and team discussions, then smart enough to add that missing context back to our tickets. The important part would be really understanding how our code is built and organized. Like combining meeting transcription tools with automatic task updates plus deep codebase analysis.
Do you think this would actually fix a real issue? What approaches have you tried for this problem?
Would appreciate any thoughts! Happy to discuss this more if anyone else is dealing with similar stuff.
Templates and reviews help, but people still forget to fill stuff out. You need to automate the whole thing.
I built something like this for our team with Latenode. It connects Slack, GitHub commits, and Jira tickets into one workflow. Someone mentions a task in standup or Slack? Latenode grabs that context and updates the ticket automatically.
The real magic is combining multiple data sources. Our setup pulls commit messages, code comments, and PR discussions to build the complete picture of each task. New devs can see everything without digging through old chat threads.
This works because everything flows through one automation platform instead of manually connecting different tools. That codebase analysis you mentioned? Our workflow scans related files and adds dependency notes automatically.
You’re spot on about combining meeting transcription with automatic updates. Most people try fixing this with better processes, but automation cuts out human error completely.
Took two days to set up, and now our ticket quality stays consistently good without anyone thinking about it.
Been dealing with this exact problem for years across different companies. The automation route sounds promising but you might be overengineering it. What actually worked for us was enforcing a simple rule during sprint planning: no ticket gets estimated unless it has clear acceptance criteria and at least one technical note about implementation approach. Forces people to think through the work upfront rather than dumping vague requirements into the backlog. We also started doing quick 5-minute ticket walkthroughs during standup for anything that seems unclear. Sure, developers hate writing documentation, but they hate wasting time on confusing tickets even more. Once they see how much smoother development flows with decent specs, most people start writing better tickets naturally. Your codebase analysis idea has merit though - linking related components automatically could save significant debugging time later.
Your automated approach might work, but I’d try something simpler first. We had the same problem until I started pair documentation sessions. When someone finishes complex work, they spend 15 minutes with a teammate walking through what they built and updating the ticket with real implementation details. The second person asks questions that catch missing context. This builds a knowledge base that shows how things actually work, not just the original plan. Documentation gets way better when you write it right after finishing the work - everything’s still fresh. Your meeting transcription idea could capture these sessions automatically. Way cheaper than building complex analysis tools and you’ll see results immediately.
I’ve encountered a similar problem in the past. The idea of automating ticket updates might seem appealing, but it often masks underlying workflow issues. We found that implementing a straightforward template for task tickets significantly improved clarity. By including essential fields like acceptance criteria and dependencies, it became much easier for developers to provide complete information. Additionally, holding brief reviews of definitions of done before tasks enter the backlog proved invaluable. If a team member struggles to convey the task’s requirements succinctly, the ticket gets sent back for clarification. This strategy drastically reduced the number of ambiguous tickets. While your suggestion of integrating meeting notes is intriguing, prioritizing human-centered processes could yield better results initially.
this is a management issue, not a tech one. I’v seen teams try automating their way out of bad habits - it just doesn’t work. Start small: make peeps write one sentence explaining WHY they’rr doing the task, not just what. auto-generated meeting notes won’t help if devs already ignore docs.