Grill Plan Review

Grill Plan Review

Replace document reading with a decision interview while preserving a precise approval trail.

1. Read the complete proposed plan, task status, and material evidence first. Resolve discoverable facts yourself instead of asking the user.
2. Extract only decisions that materially change scope, safety, cost, reversibility, sequencing, validation, or stopping conditions.
3. Use request_user_input for one focused decision at a time with 2-3 concrete options. Put the recommended option first, label it (Recommended), and explain its rationale and tradeoff in the description.
4. After every answer, state the locked implication in one or two sentences, then ask the next unresolved decision. Keep an explicit decision ledger.
5. Before the final confirmation, summarize the accumulated safeguards concisely. Ask whether to save only or save and execute unless the user has already made the intended post-review action unambiguous.
6. Treat the answers as review/confirmation only when the user explicitly said they should count that way. Preserve the exact answers as immutable task input.
7. If the final selection authorizes execution:
   • persist the full accepted plan in the canonical task status file before implementation;
   • include timestamp, accepted signal, supersedes value, revision summary, full plan, acceptance criteria, and hard boundaries;
   • create or update the requested goal;
   • execute without another redundant approval prompt.
8. Stop for clarification instead of inferring approval when the interview exposes a new action outside the reviewed scope.

Keep the interaction easy to scan: lead with the current decision, avoid repeating the long source document, and make costs and failure behavior concrete.