The four heights
The same task, four distances: today's deadline, the next reviewer, the stuck moment, the pattern.
Execute — do the immediate task
+Link these two cards so anyone on the project can navigate between the feature request and the…
Execute — do the immediate task
+Link these two cards so anyone on the project can navigate between the feature request and the related bug: 'Mobile nav redesign' and 'iOS nav overlap bug'. Add the link on both cards and write a one-line comment on each explaining the relationship and the current action owner. Set the relationship label to 'blocks' from the bug to the feature.
Pasted it? When the reply comes back, push once: ask it to sharpen the weakest part. — Did this prompt help?
Improve — make it easier to accept
+Before I link this feature card to three related bug cards, make the connection clear for a…
Improve — make it easier to accept
+Before I link this feature card to three related bug cards, make the connection clear for a reviewer: show which card is blocking which, surface the evidence (screenshots or steps to reproduce) on the blocking card, and add a short note on how fix order affects release. Suggest precise wording for the link comment so a PM can triage quickly.
Pasted it? When the reply comes back, push once: ask it to sharpen the weakest part. — Did this prompt help?
Decide — diagnose the stuck moment
+I just linked 'Mobile nav redesign' to 'iOS nav overlap bug' but developers think the feature work…
Decide — diagnose the stuck moment
+I connected a feature card to a bug card and the team is confused who fixes what
I just linked 'Mobile nav redesign' to 'iOS nav overlap bug' but developers think the feature work owns the fix and QA thinks the bug owner should. Given that both Alex (feature lead) and Priya (bug owner) are listed, how should ownership and next steps be assigned to avoid finger-pointing?
Pasted it? When the reply comes back, push once: ask it to sharpen the weakest part. — Did this prompt help?
Become — change the pattern
+Across projects we create links without consistent verbs or context, and people misread them at…
Become — change the pattern
+We keep making ambiguous card links that confuse ownership
Across projects we create links without consistent verbs or context, and people misread them at standups. What naming convention and brief linking ritual can the team adopt so every link instantly shows who owns the next action and whether it blocks a release? Propose one clear rule and an example.
Pasted it? When the reply comes back, push once: ask it to sharpen the weakest part. — Did this prompt help?
Next to this one
Other kanban boards work people do in Trello.
Every task here came from the work, not from a feature list — which is why the prompts name what you want done and never the button that does it. The tool changes; the work does not.
Copyright © LLOS.ai · 2026 — original pedagogy, voice, and design — all rights reserved.
The rest of the map
Same library, five ways in.