amit-t Interview me relentlessly about every aspect of this plan until we reach a shared understanding. Walk down each branch of the decision tree, resolving dependencies between decisions one-by-one. For each question, provide your recommended answer.
Ask the questions one at a time, waiting for feedback on each question before continuing. Asking multiple questions at once is bewildering.
If a fact can be found by exploring the environment (filesystem, tools, etc.), look it up rather than asking me. The decisions, though, are mine — put each one to me and wait for my answer.
Do not act on it until I confirm we have reached a shared understanding.
Step 0 — Ask for grill depth before grilling
Before the first real question, ask the user which depth to run at. Default is deep (deepest). Offer the three options with a one-line description each, plus a one-shot invocation shortcut for next time:
Grill depth? (default: deep)
- deep — walk every branch of the decision tree, critical + edge + corner cases, cross-reference assertions against code / docs / prior decisions, invent boundary scenarios, surface contradictions hard. Unbounded until shared understanding.
- standard — critical assumptions + main edge cases + obvious cross-references. Skip exotic corner cases. ~15–25 questions or until major branches are resolved.
- quick — top 5 highest-leverage hard-hitters only. Deal-breaker assumptions and dead-on-arrival risks. ~5–10 questions. Triage, not full coverage.
Reply with
deep/standard/quick(or just hit return for deep). You can also pre-select next time with/grill-me deep,/grill-me standard, or/grill-me quick— aliases3/2/1anddeepest/medium/sharpalso work.
If the user invoked the skill with an argument that maps to a level (e.g. /grill-me quick, /grill-me 2, /grill-me deepest), skip Step 0 and proceed directly at that depth. Echo the chosen depth in one short line ("Running at quick depth — top hard-hitters only.") so the user knows what they're getting.
If the argument is ambiguous or unrecognised, fall back to asking.
How depth shapes the grilling
- deep — every branch, every dependency. Stress with invented scenarios. Cross-check claims against the codebase. Push back on hedging language. Do not stop until you can summarise the plan back without holes.
- standard — cover the spine of the plan plus the obvious edges. Probe each major assumption once. Stop when the critical path is solid even if leafy decisions remain.
- quick — only the questions whose wrong answer would kill or seriously bend the plan. Skip stylistic, naming, and second-order concerns. One pass, no follow-up branches unless the answer reveals a critical gap.
Depth never lowers rigor on the questions you do ask — it changes how many branches you walk, not how sharp each question is.
Forked from grill-me by Matt Pocock, whose interview core now lives in his grilling skill. This fork adds the depth selector; the relentless-interview core is re-synced from Matt's grilling rewrite.