Allocate time for debt reduction

Severity: Recommended

Visibility without action just creates guilt. Teams need protected time for debt reduction.

Check automatically:

# Look for sprint/planning docs mentioning debt allocation
grep -riE "debt.*allocation|20%|tech debt.*sprint|refactor.*time|maintenance.*budget" docs/ --include="*.md" 2>/dev/null

# Check for team process documentation
find . -maxdepth 4 -type f \( -name "*planning*" -o -name "*sprint*" -o -name "*process*" \) -name "*.md" 2>/dev/null | grep -v node_modules

# Check for closed debt items recently (evidence of work)
gh issue list --label "tech-debt" --state closed --json title,closedAt --limit 10 2>/dev/null

Ask user:

• "Is there dedicated time for debt reduction?" (percentage of sprint, dedicated sprints, Friday afternoons)
• "What's the target allocation?" (10%, 20%, 1 sprint per quarter)
• "Is it protected or does it get deprioritized when features are urgent?"
• "How is it tracked?" (separate epic, label, honor system)

Common allocation patterns:

Pattern	Description
Percentage per sprint	10-20% of each sprint for debt
Dedicated sprints	Full sprint every N weeks for cleanup
Boy Scout rule	No dedicated time, improve as you go
Feature tax	Each feature includes related cleanup
Quarterly cleanup	One focused push per quarter

Pass criteria:

• Explicit allocation policy exists (even informal)
• Team knows the target
• Allocation is somewhat protected from feature pressure
• Evidence of debt work being done (closed items, PRs)

Fail criteria:

• No allocation ("we'll get to it eventually")
• Policy exists but always deprioritized
• Only happens in quiet periods (reactive, not proactive)
• Zero debt items closed in last quarter

Cross-reference with:

• DEBT-003 (review is where allocation decisions happen)
• DEBT-005 (tracking validates allocation is real)

Evidence to capture:

• Allocation policy (documented or verbal)
• Target percentage/cadence
• Recent debt items closed (count, dates)
• Whether allocation is protected

---