Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Track complex, multi-session work with dependency graphs using bd (beads) issue tracker. Use when work spans multiple sessions, has complex dependencies, or requires persistent context across compaction cycles. For simple single-session linear tasks, TodoWrite remains appropriate.
.claude/skills/microck-bd-issue-tracking/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-22 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 182% | 0% |
| case-07 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 261% | 0% |
| case-08 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 525% | 0% |
| case-09 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 399% | 0% |
| case-11 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 335% | 0% |
bd is a graph-based issue tracker for persistent memory across sessions. Use for multi-session work with complex dependencies; use TodoWrite for simple single-session tasks.
Key insight: If resuming work after 2 weeks would be difficult without bd, use bd. If the work can be picked up from a markdown skim, TodoWrite is sufficient.
Ask these questions to decide:
Choose bd if:
Choose TodoWrite if:
When in doubt: Use bd. Better to have persistent memory you don't need than to lose context you needed.
For detailed decision criteria and examples, read: references/BOUNDARIES.md
Critical: Compaction events delete conversation history but preserve beads. After compaction, bd state is your only persistent memory.
What survives compaction:
What doesn't survive:
Writing notes for post-compaction recovery:
Write notes as if explaining to a future agent with zero conversation context:
Pattern:
markdownnotes field format: - COMPLETED: Specific deliverables ("implemented JWT refresh endpoint + rate limiting") - IN PROGRESS: Current state + next immediate step ("testing password reset flow, need user input on email template") - BLOCKERS: What's preventing progress - KEY DECISIONS: Important context or user guidance
After compaction: bd show <issue-id> reconstructs full context from notes field.
Before checkpointing (especially pre-compaction), verify your notes pass these tests:
❓ Future-me test: "Could I resume this work in 2 weeks with zero conversation history?"
❓ Stranger test: "Could another developer understand this without asking me?"
Good note example:
COMPLETED: JWT auth with RS256 (1hr access, 7d refresh tokens)
KEY DECISION: RS256 over HS256 per security review - enables key rotation
IN PROGRESS: Password reset flow - email service working, need rate limiting
BLOCKERS: Waiting on user decision: reset token expiry (15min vs 1hr trade-off)
NEXT: Implement rate limiting (5 attempts/15min) once expiry decidedBad note example:
Working on auth. Made some progress. More to do.For complete compaction recovery workflow, read: references/WORKFLOWS.md
bd is available when:
.beads/ directory (project-local database), OR~/.beads/ exists (global fallback database for any directory)At session start, always check for bd availability and run ready check.
Copy this checklist when starting any session where bd is available:
Session Start:
- [ ] Run bd ready --json to see available work
- [ ] Run bd list --status in_progress --json for active work
- [ ] If in_progress exists: bd show <issue-id> to read notes
- [ ] Report context to user: "X items ready: [summary]"
- [ ] If using global ~/.beads, mention this in report
- [ ] If nothing ready: bd blocked --json to check blockersPattern: Always check both bd ready AND bd list --status in_progress. Read notes field first to understand where previous session left off.
Report format:
This establishes immediate shared context about available and active work without requiring user prompting.
For detailed collaborative handoff process, read: references/WORKFLOWS.md
Note: bd auto-discovers the database:
.beads/*.db in current project if exists~/.beads/default.db otherwiseIf bd ready returns empty but issues exist:
bashbd blocked --json
Report blockers and suggest next steps.
Update bd notes at these checkpoints (don't wait for session end):
Critical triggers:
Proactive monitoring during session:
Current token usage: Check <system-warning>Token usage: messages to monitor proactively.
Checkpoint checklist:
Progress Checkpoint:
- [ ] Update notes with COMPLETED/IN_PROGRESS/NEXT format
- [ ] Document KEY DECISIONS or BLOCKERS since last update
- [ ] Mark current status (in_progress/blocked/closed)
- [ ] If discovered new work: create issues with discovered-from
- [ ] Verify notes are self-explanatory for post-compaction resumeMost important: When user says "running out of context" OR when you see >70% token usage - checkpoint immediately, even if mid-task.
Test yourself: "If compaction happened right now, could future-me resume from these notes?"
bd automatically selects the appropriate database:
.beads/ in project): Used for project-specific work~/.beads/): Used when no project-local database existsUse case for global database: Cross-project tracking, personal task management, knowledge work that doesn't belong to a specific project.
When to use --db flag explicitly:
bd --db /path/to/reference/terms.db listDatabase discovery rules:
.beads/*.db in current working directory~/.beads/default.dbFor complete session start workflows, read: references/WORKFLOWS.md
All bd commands support --json flag for structured output when needed for programmatic parsing.
Check ready work:
bashbd ready bd ready --json # For structured output bd ready --priority 0 # Filter by priority bd ready --assignee alice # Filter by assignee
Create new issue:
IMPORTANT: Always quote title and description arguments with double quotes, especially when containing spaces or special characters.
bashbd create "Fix login bug" bd create "Add OAuth" -p 0 -t feature bd create "Write tests" -d "Unit tests for auth module" --assignee alice bd create "Research caching" --design "Evaluate Redis vs Memcached" # Examples with special characters (requires quoting): bd create "Fix: auth doesn't handle edge cases" -p 1 bd create "Refactor auth module" -d "Split auth.go into separate files (handlers, middleware, utils)"
Update issue status:
bashbd update issue-123 --status in_progress bd update issue-123 --priority 0 bd update issue-123 --assignee bob bd update issue-123 --design "Decided to use Redis for persistence support"
Close completed work:
bashbd close issue-123 bd close issue-123 --reason "Implemented in PR #42" bd close issue-1 issue-2 issue-3 --reason "Bulk close related work"
Show issue details:
bashbd show issue-123 bd show issue-123 --json
List issues:
bashbd list bd list --status open bd list --priority 0 bd list --type bug bd list --assignee alice
For complete CLI reference with all flags and examples, read: references/CLI_REFERENCE.md
Quick guide for when and how to use each bd field:
| Field | Purpose | When to Set | Update Frequency | |-------|---------|-------------|------------------| | description | Immutable problem statement | At creation | Never (fixed forever) | | design | Initial approach, architecture, decisions | During planning | Rarely (only if approach changes) | | acceptance-criteria | Concrete deliverables checklist (- [ ] syntax) | When design is clear | Mark - [x] as items complete | | notes | Session handoff (COMPLETED/IN_PROGRESS/NEXT) | During work | At session end, major milestones | | status | Workflow state (open→in_progress→closed) | As work progresses | When changing phases | | priority | Urgency level (0=highest, 3=lowest) | At creation | Adjust if priorities shift |
Key pattern: Notes field is your "read me first" at session start. See WORKFLOWS.md for session handoff details.
During exploration or implementation, proactively file issues for:
Pattern:
bash# When encountering new work during a task: bd create "Found: auth doesn't handle profile permissions" bd dep add current-task-id new-issue-id --type discovered-from # Continue with original task - issue persists for later
Key benefit: Capture context immediately instead of losing it when conversation ends.
Mark issues in_progress when starting work:
bashbd update issue-123 --status in_progress
Update throughout work:
bash# Add design notes as implementation progresses bd update issue-123 --design "Using JWT with RS256 algorithm" # Update acceptance criteria if requirements clarify bd update issue-123 --acceptance "- JWT validation works\n- Tests pass\n- Error handling returns 401"
Close when complete:
bashbd close issue-123 --reason "Implemented JWT validation with tests passing"
Important: Closed issues remain in database - they're not deleted, just marked complete for project history.
For complex multi-step work, structure issues with dependencies before starting:
Create parent epic:
bashbd create "Implement user authentication" -t epic -d "OAuth integration with JWT tokens"
Create subtasks:
bashbd create "Set up OAuth credentials" -t task bd create "Implement authorization flow" -t task bd create "Add token refresh" -t task
Link with dependencies:
bash# parent-child for epic structure bd dep add auth-epic auth-setup --type parent-child bd dep add auth-epic auth-flow --type parent-child # blocks for ordering bd dep add auth-setup auth-flow
For detailed dependency patterns and types, read: references/DEPENDENCIES.md
bd supports four dependency types:
For complete guide on when to use each type with examples and patterns, read: references/DEPENDENCIES.md
Both tools complement each other at different timescales:
TodoWrite (short-term working memory - this hour):
Beads (long-term episodic memory - this week/month):
After compaction: TodoWrite is gone forever, but bead notes reconstruct what happened.
TodoWrite:
[completed] Implement login endpoint
[in_progress] Add password hashing with bcrypt
[pending] Create session middlewareCorresponding bead notes:
bd update issue-123 --notes "COMPLETED: Login endpoint with bcrypt password
hashing (12 rounds). KEY DECISION: Using JWT tokens (not sessions) for stateless
auth - simplifies horizontal scaling. IN PROGRESS: Session middleware implementation.
NEXT: Need user input on token expiry time (1hr vs 24hr trade-off)."Don't duplicate: TodoWrite tracks execution, Beads captures meaning and context.
For patterns on transitioning between tools mid-session, read: references/BOUNDARIES.md
Scenario: User asks "Help me write a proposal for expanding the analytics platform"
What you see:
bash$ bd ready # Returns: bd-42 "Research analytics platform expansion proposal" (in_progress) $ bd show bd-42 Notes: "COMPLETED: Reviewed current stack (Mixpanel, Amplitude) IN PROGRESS: Drafting cost-benefit analysis section NEXT: Need user input on budget constraints before finalizing recommendations"
What you do:
bash bd update bd-42 --notes "COMPLETED: Cost-benefit analysis drafted. KEY DECISION: User confirmed $50k budget cap - ruled out enterprise options. IN PROGRESS: Finalizing recommendations (Posthog + custom ETL). NEXT: Get user review of draft before closing issue."
Outcome: TodoWrite disappears at session end, but bd notes preserve context for next session.
During main task, discover a problem:
bd create "Found: inventory system needs refactoring"bd dep add main-task new-issue --type discovered-frombd update main-task --status blocked, work on new issueStarting work after time away:
bd ready to see available workbd blocked to understand what's stuckbd list --status closed --limit 10 to see recent completionsbd show issue-id on issue to work onFor complete workflow walkthroughs with checklists, read: references/WORKFLOWS.md
Quick guidelines:
Copy when creating new issues:
Creating Issue:
- [ ] Title: Clear, specific, action-oriented
- [ ] Description: Problem statement (WHY this matters) - immutable
- [ ] Design: HOW to build (can change during work)
- [ ] Acceptance: WHAT success looks like (stays stable)
- [ ] Priority: 0=critical, 1=high, 2=normal, 3=low
- [ ] Type: bug/feature/task/epic/choreSelf-check for acceptance criteria:
❓ "If I changed the implementation approach, would these criteria still apply?"
Example:
For detailed guidance on when to ask vs create, issue quality, resumability patterns, and design vs acceptance criteria, read: references/ISSUE_CREATION.md
bd is primarily for work tracking, but can also serve as queryable database for static reference data (glossaries, terminology) with adaptations.
For guidance on using bd for reference databases and static data, read: references/STATIC_DATA.md
Check project health:
bashbd stats bd stats --json
Returns: total issues, open, in_progress, closed, blocked, ready, avg lead time
Find blocked work:
bashbd blocked bd blocked --json
Use stats to:
bashbd create "Title" -t task # Standard work item (default) bd create "Title" -t bug # Defect or problem bd create "Title" -t feature # New functionality bd create "Title" -t epic # Large work with subtasks bd create "Title" -t chore # Maintenance or cleanup
bashbd create "Title" -p 0 # Highest priority (critical) bd create "Title" -p 1 # High priority bd create "Title" -p 2 # Normal priority (default) bd create "Title" -p 3 # Low priority
bash# Close multiple issues at once bd close issue-1 issue-2 issue-3 --reason "Completed in sprint 5" # Create multiple issues from markdown file bd create --file issues.md
bash# Show full dependency tree for an issue bd dep tree issue-123 # Check for circular dependencies bd dep cycles
bash# Quick start guide (comprehensive built-in reference) bd quickstart # Command-specific help bd create --help bd dep --help
All bd commands support --json flag for structured output:
bashbd ready --json bd show issue-123 --json bd list --status open --json bd stats --json
Use JSON output when you need to parse results programmatically or extract specific fields.
If bd command not found:
bd versionIf issues seem lost:
bd list to see all issuesbd list --status closedIf bd show can't find issue by name:
bd show requires issue IDs, not issue titlesbd list | grep -i "search term" to find ID firstbd show issue-id with the discovered IDIf dependencies seem wrong:
bd show issue-id to see full dependency treebd dep tree issue-id for visualizationbd dep add from-id to-id means from-id blocks to-idIf database seems out of sync:
bd export, bd importDetailed information organized by topic:
| Reference | Read When | |-----------|-----------| | references/BOUNDARIES.md | Need detailed decision criteria for bd vs TodoWrite, or integration patterns | | references/CLI_REFERENCE.md | Need complete command reference, flag details, or examples | | references/WORKFLOWS.md | Need step-by-step workflows with checklists for common scenarios | | references/DEPENDENCIES.md | Need deep understanding of dependency types or relationship patterns | | references/ISSUE_CREATION.md | Need guidance on when to ask vs create issues, issue quality, or design vs acceptance criteria | | references/STATIC_DATA.md | Want to use bd for reference databases, glossaries, or static data instead of work tracking |
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-22 | fail→pass | 16,812 | 9,104 | -46% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,531 | 7,147 | +182% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-01 | fail→fail | 1,852 | 4,845 | +162% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 294 | 5,875 | +1898% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→fail | 11,946 | 4,705 | -61% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,052 | 5,861 | +457% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | fail→fail | 9,271 | 5,631 | -39% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,450 | 5,900 | +307% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | pass→pass | 4,308 | 3,887 | -10% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 665 | 6,244 | +839% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | pass→fail | 3,652 | 5,513 | +51% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 577 | 5,893 | +921% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | pass→pass | 7,291 | 5,990 | -18% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,463 | 6,564 | +349% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | fail→pass | 13,273 | 7,833 | -41% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,901 | 6,868 | +261% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | fail→pass | 7,486 | 7,046 | -6% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,088 | 6,796 | +525% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | fail→pass | 7,601 | 2,117 | -72% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,188 | 5,928 | +399% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | pass→pass | 15,783 | 2,838 | -82% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,627 | 6,052 | +130% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | fail→pass | 8,424 | 2,610 | -69% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,398 | 6,075 | +335% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | pass→pass | 12,867 | 4,716 | -63% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,941 | 6,439 | +232% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | fail→pass | 16,385 | 2,845 | -83% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,843 | 6,071 | +114% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | fail→pass | 7,519 | 2,926 | -61% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,143 | 6,056 | +430% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | fail→pass | 14,285 | 3,008 | -79% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,439 | 6,074 | +149% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | fail→pass | 8,756 | 1,751 | -80% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,549 | 5,917 | +282% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | fail→pass | 8,211 | 3,593 | -56% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,455 | 6,164 | +324% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | pass→pass | 8,808 | 4,622 | -48% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,391 | 6,397 | +360% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | fail→pass | 13,250 | 1,858 | -86% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,291 | 5,846 | +155% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | fail→pass | 13,269 | 1,491 | -89% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,907 | 5,805 | +204% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | fail→pass | 9,450 | 4,204 | -56% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,552 | 6,261 | +303% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 22 cases were attempted, and 18 counted toward the lift figure. The other 4 produced results that are not comparable between the two arms, so they are excluded from the headline rather than averaged into it. The headline lift of +55 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 18 comparable cases. 1 case got worse with the skill loaded, and it is included in that figure.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.