The symptom is specific: the backlog contains solutions without defined problems. Start with the affected item and identify the decision or input that could produce this behavior.
Find the likely cause
Requests arrive as predetermined tasks.
Treat this as an explanation to verify against the actual work. Look at the input, the relevant decision, and the final result together. If the evidence does not support this diagnosis, investigate the mismatch before applying a convenient but unrelated fix.
Make the targeted correction
Write the user or business problem before evaluating the proposed fix.
A useful backlog makes trade-offs visible so the team spends effort on work with a credible connection to customer and business needs.
Check that the repair worked
Reject work whose purpose cannot be explained clearly.
Repeat the check on the final version that the reader or customer will encounter. An approved draft, a preview, and a published result can differ; the acceptance decision should concern the version people actually use.
Prevent the next related failure
A separate issue to watch for is this: every stakeholder labels their request urgent. Use explicit criteria and show what new work would displace.
Monitor the useful outcome
Track completed useful work, aging blocked items, and the reasons priorities change.
Keep a short record of the original symptom, the evidence behind the diagnosis, and the result of the acceptance check. That record makes the solution reusable when the same condition appears again, without assuming that every superficially similar problem has the same cause.