grill-with-docs

Interrogate engineering plans against CONTEXT.md, ADRs, and codebase conventions.

2|Updated Apr 8, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/miptah21/skills --skill grill-with-docs-miptah21
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: grill-with-docs
Source: https://github.com/miptah21/skills/tree/main/.agents/skills/grill-with-docs
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/miptah21/skills --skill grill-with-docs-miptah21

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill includes references (resource) components.

What problem does it solve?

This Skill helps you resolve ambiguous or conflicting design decisions by challenging your plan against the project’s existing domain glossary and documented trade-offs, so outcomes match how your system is actually meant to work.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Relentless plan interrogation: Interviews the proposed solution branch-by-branch, asking one question at a time and waiting for your answers to converge on shared understanding.
  • Domain glossary sharpening: Detects term conflicts with CONTEXT.md and forces precise canonical terminology when users use vague or overloaded concepts.
  • Documentation-updating guidance: Updates CONTEXT.md inline as terms are resolved and offers ADRs sparingly when a decision is hard to reverse, surprising, and involves real trade-offs.
  • Code cross-checking: Explores the codebase when possible to verify your claims and surface contradictions between the plan and current implementation.

Quick Start

Ask the AI to run grill-with-docs on your plan, challenging every branch against your existing CONTEXT.md and docs/adr files until you reach precise terminology and aligned decisions.

Frequently Asked Questions about grill-with-docs

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I stress-test an engineering plan against my existing domain model?

Architecture reviews benefit from domain glossary checks by detecting terminology conflicts in CONTEXT.md, verifying claims against the codebase, and forcing precise canonical definitions during design evaluations.

How do I resolve terminology conflicts between a design plan and my codebase?

You resolve terminology conflicts by exploring the codebase to verify claims, updating CONTEXT.md inline with precise canonical terms, and proposing ADRs when decisions involve non-obvious, hard-to-reverse trade-offs.

When should I generate an ADR during a design review?

Yes, you can verify engineering assumptions against existing documentation by exploring the codebase to surface contradictions between your proposed plan and the current implementation during architecture reviews.

What is the best way to disambiguate overloaded domain concepts in a software project?

The best way to disambiguate overloaded domain concepts is through relentless one-at-a-time plan interrogation that challenges vague terms against your project's domain glossary to converge on shared understanding.