grill-me

Interrogate project plans and design architectures through iterative decision-tree questioning.

Updated Apr 30, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/znc15/Open-Design --skill grill-me-znc15
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: grill-me
Source: https://github.com/znc15/Open-Design/tree/main/.agents/skills/grill-me
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/znc15/Open-Design --skill grill-me-znc15

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

This Skill addresses the lack of critical oversight in early-stage planning by forcing a deep, systematic examination of your design decisions and project assumptions.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Systematic Interrogation: Breaks down complex plans into individual branches of the decision tree to ensure no dependency is overlooked.
  • Shared Understanding: Facilitates a collaborative environment where the AI acts as a devil's advocate to refine your logic.
  • Use Case: Use this when you have a draft architecture or project roadmap and need to identify potential failure points or missing requirements before implementation begins.

Quick Start

Activate the grill-me skill and provide your project plan to begin the systematic review process.

Frequently Asked Questions about grill-me

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I stress-test my project plan for logical consistency and missing dependencies?

To stress-test a project plan, conduct a rigorous step-by-step interrogation that traverses decision trees and resolves dependencies through focused questioning to validate assumptions against technical realities. This systematic interrogation breaks down complex architectures into individual branches to ensure no dependency is overlooked.

What is the best way to identify failure points in a draft architecture before implementation?

The best way to identify failure points in a draft architecture is using systematic interrogation to act as a devil's advocate. This forces a deep examination of design decisions and project assumptions, ensuring logical consistency and comprehensive coverage before development begins.

Can I use critical-thinking analysis to validate technical assumptions in my codebase?

Yes, you can use critical-thinking analysis to validate technical assumptions by analyzing provided context and codebase information. This process resolves dependencies through iterative reasoning to ensure your design architecture aligns with actual technical realities.

Does systematic interrogation work for early-stage planning and design architectures?

Yes, systematic interrogation works for early-stage planning by providing critical oversight. It forces a deep examination of design decisions and project assumptions, ensuring logical consistency and comprehensive coverage across complex project roadmaps and architectures.

When should I not use rigorous inquiry for project planning?

You should avoid rigorous inquiry for project planning when you lack a draft architecture or codebase context to analyze. This process requires traversing decision trees and resolving dependencies, which necessitates having an existing project plan with defined technical assumptions to evaluate.