Linear Tickets from Internal Meeting (Dec 12, 2025)
This document contains the structured ticket data ready for creation in Linear via MCP.
Ticket 1: Archive Inactive GitHub Repositories
Title: Archive inactive GitHub repositories (Data Provider, Snowflake, Evidence, etc.)
Description:
#### Context
Team meeting identified multiple inactive repositories that need to be archived. Gabriel has list in Notion, Rico has super admin access to help.
#### Goal
Clean up GitHub organization by archiving repositories that are no longer active.
#### Scope
**In scope**
- Archive Data Provider
- Archive Snowflake Data Provider
- Archive Internal Brainforge analytics
- Archive Evidence Dashboard
- Archive GMAT email processor
- Archive old backend/website/web platform repos (previous versions)
- Archive HPI demo repo
- Archive VitaCoco client repo
- Archive ABC AI benchmark (Patrick created, not in use)
- Update Notion tracking document
**Out of scope**
- Active repos (GLT pipelines, Windmill workspace, take-home challenge, etc.)
- Client repos that are still in use
- Brainforge Files Analytics (active for marketing)
#### Acceptance Criteria
- All listed repositories archived in GitHub
- Notion tracking document updated
- Team notified of archived repos
#### Notes / Constraints
Rico has super admin access to help archive. Gabriel tracking in Notion first, then will update GitHub. Windmill workspace still active but needs sync (separate ticket).Ticket 2: Sync Windmill Workspace Repository
Title: Sync Windmill workspace repository
Description:
#### Context
Windmill workspace repo exists but hasn't been synced. Casie needs to check and sync it.
#### Goal
Ensure Windmill workspace repository is properly synced and up to date.
#### Scope
**In scope**
- Verify current state of Windmill workspace repo
- Sync repository if needed
- Confirm it's still in use
**Out of scope**
- Major refactoring of Windmill setup
- Migration to different tool
#### Acceptance Criteria
- Windmill workspace repository synced
- Confirmed still in active use
- No sync errors
#### Notes / Constraints
Casie to check and sync. Uttam confirmed it's still active, just needs sync.Ticket 3: Integrate Supabase MCP with Cursor for Transcript Access
Title: Integrate Supabase MCP tool with Cursor for direct database queries
Description:
#### Context
Team discussed using Supabase MCP tool to query transcripts/summaries directly from Supabase instead of migrating files to GitHub. Mustafa found Cursor data science section with Postgres MCP tool.
#### Goal
Enable Cursor agents to query Supabase tables directly for transcripts, summaries, and meeting data.
#### Scope
**In scope**
- Explore Supabase MCP tool options
- Set up MCP connection to Supabase
- Test querying transcripts/summaries from database
- Document workflow for agents to use Supabase queries
- Example: "Take last meeting and create SOW" workflow
**Out of scope**
- Migrating all Supabase data to GitHub
- Changing Supabase schema
- Notion cleanup (separate effort)
#### Acceptance Criteria
- Supabase MCP tool integrated with Cursor
- Can query transcripts/summaries from Supabase
- Example workflow documented (meeting → SOW creation)
- Agents can use Supabase as data source
#### Notes / Constraints
Mustafa exploring this first. Much more elegant than moving files. Supabase has MCP support. Example use case: query latest meetings, select one, create SOW from it.Ticket 4: Migrate Prompts Library from Notion to Playbook Repo
Title: Migrate prompts library from Notion to brainforge-playbook repository
Description:
#### Context
Uttam wants to move all prompts from Notion prompts library to the playbook repo and deprecate Notion version. Focus is on adoption, not version control.
#### Goal
Centralize all prompts in GitHub playbook repo for easier access and agent usage.
#### Scope
**In scope**
- Export prompts from Notion prompts library
- Create appropriate folder structure in playbook repo
- Migrate all prompts to markdown files
- Update agent documentation to reference new location
- Deprecate Notion prompts library
**Out of scope**
- Version control for prompt variations (Rico/Ryan different versions handled separately)
- Notion cleanup beyond prompts library
#### Acceptance Criteria
- All prompts migrated to playbook repo
- Folder structure created and documented
- Agent docs updated to reference new location
- Notion prompts library marked as deprecated
#### Notes / Constraints
Uttam wants to start committing examples later today/tomorrow. Focus is on getting people to use prompts, not managing versions. Prompts need to live in repo (not just Supabase) for agent access.Ticket 5: Create Linear Ticket Agent Documentation for Cursor
Title: Create documentation for using Cursor to interact with Linear (agent guide)
Description:
#### Context
Uttam wants standardized process for how AI agents should interact with Linear through Cursor. Should reference linear-ticket-agent.md and Linear usage doc from ops team.
#### Goal
Create comprehensive guide that agents can reference to standardize Linear ticket creation/updates through Cursor.
#### Scope
**In scope**
- Document plan mode requirement for Linear operations
- Specify ticket display format in plan (create/update details)
- Document output requirements (links for verification)
- Reference existing linear-ticket-agent.md
- Include examples from Linear usage doc (status meanings, etc.)
- Ensure agents follow consistent process
**Out of scope**
- Changing Linear workflow itself
- CLI vs MCP decision (MCP preferred due to search functionality)
#### Acceptance Criteria
- Documentation created in playbook repo
- Covers plan mode workflow
- Includes ticket format requirements
- References existing Linear docs
- Agents can follow guide to standardize behavior
#### Notes / Constraints
Uttam wants agents to: use plan mode, display all tickets in plan, output links for verification. Should point to this doc so agents learn standardized process. Ops team has Linear usage doc with status examples - should be included.Ticket 6: Add Example Writings to Vault for Agent Reference
Title: Add past approved example writings to vault for agent reference
Description:
#### Context
Uttam wants to add all past approved example writings (SOWs, PRDs, etc.) to vault so agents can reference them when creating new documents.
#### Goal
Build reference library of approved examples for agents to learn from.
#### Scope
**In scope**
- Identify approved example writings (SOWs, PRDs, technical docs)
- Add examples to appropriate vault location
- Organize by document type
- Ensure agents can reference these examples
**Out of scope**
- Migrating all historical documents
- Creating new examples
#### Acceptance Criteria
- Example writings added to vault
- Organized by document type
- Agents can reference examples in workflows
#### Notes / Constraints
Part of building comprehensive knowledge base. Examples help agents understand quality bar and format expectations.Ticket 7: Add All Transcripts to Vault
Title: Add all meeting transcripts to vault repository
Description:
#### Context
Uttam wants to get all transcripts into vault so agents can access them for context and document creation.
#### Goal
Ensure all meeting transcripts are accessible in vault for agent workflows.
#### Scope
**In scope**
- Identify all transcripts (current locations: Supabase, various repos)
- Add transcripts to vault repository
- Organize by date/client/meeting type
- Ensure proper structure for agent parsing
**Out of scope**
- Transcript migration from Supabase (will query via MCP)
- Creating new transcripts
#### Acceptance Criteria
- All transcripts accessible in vault
- Proper organization/structure
- Agents can find and use transcripts
#### Notes / Constraints
With Supabase MCP integration, may query directly from database rather than storing in repo. Need to clarify final approach.Ticket 8: Finalize Repository Structure Decision
Title: Finalize repository structure decision (vault consolidation vs platform repo)
Description:
#### Context
Team discussed whether to consolidate vault into platform repo or keep separate. Uttam suggested maybe just two repos: playbook and platform.
#### Goal
Make final decision on repository structure and consolidate accordingly.
#### Scope
**In scope**
- Evaluate vault vs platform repo options
- Make decision on structure
- Consolidate if needed
- Update agent documentation with new structure
**Out of scope**
- Notion cleanup (separate effort)
- Client repo structure (keep as is)
#### Acceptance Criteria
- Repository structure decision finalized
- Consolidation completed if needed
- Agent docs updated
- Team aligned on structure
#### Notes / Constraints
Gabriel initially separated vault to avoid making platform repo gigantic. Uttam questioning if vault needs separate repo. Brainforge Files is for marketing assets. Need to decide: playbook + platform, or playbook + platform + vault?Meeting Reference
Source: Internal team meeting transcript - Dec 12, 2025 Participants: Gabriel Lam, Casie Aviles, Mustafa Raja, Uttam Kumaran