pelizzai-interview-me

To stop an AI agent from making assumptions about ambiguous project requirements, implement a structured interviewing process that pauses execution and forces evidence-based human decision-making. This approach systematically identifies undefined interface contracts and presents prioritized options for explicit user ratification.

Structured human input for project gap analysis is a decision-making mechanism that resolves material project gaps by facilitating one-question-at-a-time interactions. It identifies undefined risks during discovery and execution, then records the chosen path directly within the technical plan.

Facilitate evidence-based decision-making between an AI agent and a human user by requiring the agent to pause execution when encountering missing UX flows or security gaps. The agent presents 2-3 viable options with recommendations, awaits human ratification, and documents the final decision.

Yes, you can use structured interviewing to resolve undefined security requirements during implementation. When the AI agent detects a gap, it pauses to present viable options and recommendations, ensuring the security choice is explicitly ratified and updated in the project plan.

The best way to document architectural choices made during AI-assisted development is to integrate a governance skill that automatically updates the project plan. It records the finalized decision immediately after the human user selects an option during the structured interview process.

You should not rely on AI inferences for project governance when facing material decisions regarding product, architecture, or scope. Prevent the AI from filling gaps with reasonable inferences by requiring explicit human ratification through a structured, one-question-at-a-time interviewing process.