Split a file that outgrew its module boundary
A file that accumulated several responsibilities, split along them with the exports unchanged.
The ticket
Split an oversized file along its responsibilities without changing its public exports.
Acceptance criteria
- The public exports are unchanged
- Each new file has one responsibility
- Existing tests pass without modification
- Every resulting file is under the project's size limit
What lands as proof
An unchanged export surface and an unmodified test suite, which prove this was a move rather than a rewrite.
Why teams defer it
- It works, and splitting it produces a diff that looks enormous for no functional change.
- Deciding the boundaries is a design judgement, and getting it wrong makes navigation worse.
Questions
- What does the agent actually change?
- The ticket is scoped to one outcome: split an oversized file along its responsibilities without changing its public exports. Work that serves that outcome is in scope, and anything outside it is left for a separate ticket, so the pull request stays reviewable.
- How do I know the work is done?
- The pull request carries the evidence, not only the diff. Here that means same exports, same tests, files under the agreed limit, so a reviewer can confirm the result without reproducing the work locally.
- How much oversight does this need?
- None is required before the run starts. Every claim this ticket makes can be checked by machine, so the agent works straight through and a person reviews the finished pull request like any other.