Conduct adversarial interviews that walk decision trees one question at a time.
npx skills add https://github.com/karitham/dotfiles --skill grill-me-karitham
Please help me install this Agent Skill. Skill: grill-me Source: https://github.com/karitham/dotfiles/tree/main/modules/opencode/skills/grill-me Command: npx skills add https://github.com/karitham/dotfiles --skill grill-me-karitham
Adversarial interview mode that walks the full decision tree one question at a time. Activated when the user wants more rigor than normal discussion — stress-testing a plan, getting grilled on a design, or mentions "grill me", "help me decide", "what are the options", "tradeoffs", "RFC", "design doc".
Ask the system to grill your plan by requesting one concrete question at a time and waiting for your answer before proceeding.
High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.
An adversarial review stress-tests your RFC by walking the full decision tree one question at a time. This structured cadence isolates assumptions and exposes weak points in your design doc before implementation.
A decision-tree interview for architecture decisions maps out dependencies and challenges your plan sequentially. It requires a strict one-question cadence, waiting for your answer before proceeding to expose tradeoffs and failure modes.
You identify tradeoffs and failure modes in technical planning by conducting an adversarial interview. This approach isolates assumptions and explicitly documents weak points across your architecture decisions or RFC.
Yes, you can use adversarial review for risk analysis on your design. It challenges your plan by mapping the full decision tree, isolating hidden assumptions, and explicitly documenting tradeoffs and potential failure modes.
You need an adversarial review when you want more rigor than a normal design discussion provides. It is ideal for stress-testing a plan, evaluating an RFC, or mapping tradeoffs when you mention being grilled on a design.
The limitation of a one-question cadence for design reviews is that it requires clearly defined decision dependencies and strict adherence to waiting for an answer before proceeding, which may slow down rapid brainstorming.
juan-estrada-ittiConstruct structured Markdown RFC documents from PRDs and problem descriptions.
AnjinMeiliGenerate pre-execution failure mode checklists requiring explicit acknowledgment before planning, architecture, or implementation.
kmshihab7878Analyze complex engineering problems with structured reasoning and tradeoff matrices.
microsoftAnalyzes system designs for vulnerabilities and risks through multi-perspective adversarial review.
