grill

name

grill

description

Challenge plans by extracting every open decision from the PRD and resolving them one by one — skip none. Interview relentlessly about every aspect of the plan, walking down each branch of the design tree until shared understanding is reached. Use after think to validate the plan against the existing domain model, sharpen terminology, update CONTEXT.md and ADRs. Trigger words: challenge, 细化和验证, deep dive, question the plan, grill, validate plan, 这个方案行不行, 审查设计, find holes, stress test.

Grill: Challenge Plans and Update Domain Knowledge

🥷 Challenge the plan before coding.

Interview me relentlessly about every aspect of this plan until we reach shared understanding. Walk down each branch of the design tree, resolving dependencies between decisions one-by-one. For each question, provide your recommended answer.

Ask the questions one at a time — a question's answer often changes how you frame the next one (this is a dependency chain, not serial interrogation; see anti-pattern #3 and #4).

If a question can be answered by exploring the codebase, explore the codebase instead.

Outcome Contract

• Outcome: Validated PRD aligned with the domain model, CONTEXT.md sharpened, significant decisions recorded as ADRs
• Done when: Every open decision resolved, terminology consistent with CONTEXT.md, ADRs created where the 3 conditions are met
• Evidence: Updated docs/prd/PRD-NNNN-<title>.md (status → Grilled), updated CONTEXT.md, created docs/adr/<NNNN>-*.md (where warranted)
• Output: Parent Issue synced (if created by /think), next step to /story

Before You Start

Apply the Skill Entry Protocol — it locates the PRD and CONTEXT.md and checks upstream artifacts. If no PRD exists or it's too thin, suggest /think first — don't grill vapor.

The Work

1. Extract everything unresolved. Read the PRD with hostile eyes: Open Questions, unvalidated Assumptions, vague terms, unexplained scope boundaries, shaky technical approach, edge cases, conflicts with CONTEXT.md. Skip none.
2. Work the checklist one item at a time. Give your recommended answer first, then ask. Dependency-chain questions stay one-at-a-time; independent items may be batched.
3. Resolve as you go, not in a batch at the end. Update files inline:
   • Terminology resolved → update CONTEXT.md now (glossary only, no implementation details).
   • Significant decision → offer an ADR when all three are true: (1) hard to reverse, (2) surprising without context, (3) result of a real trade-off. Otherwise skip.
   • Code can answer it → grep/read the code instead of asking the user.
4. Run the exhaustiveness gate before declaring complete: Open Questions, Assumptions, terms, scope, code cross-check — all resolved.
5. Fill the PRD ## Traceability Grilled by field so downstream skills know the plan was validated.
6. Sync the parent Issue (if it exists). Update its body to reflect scope changes (sharpened terms, confirmed boundaries, new ADRs). Do not change title or close it. If the ## Issue field is empty, check the PRD's Created by field — if /story, skip (expected); if /think, warn the user that the parent Issue was not created (see REFERENCE.md for exact message).

What Goes Where

Situation	Action
Goal statement itself needs to change, or fundamental approach invalidated	Send back to /think — too big for grill
Only terminology sharpened, scope confirmed, approach validated with refinements	Proceed to /story

For the challenge types (terminology conflict, fuzzy language, scope boundary, edge case, code cross-check), the file layout (single vs multi-context via CONTEXT-MAP.md), and a worked example, see REFERENCE.md.

Gotchas

What happened	Rule
Skipped an unresolved assumption	Extract every open item first, then resolve each
Updated CONTEXT.md in a batch at the end	Update inline, the moment each term resolves
Created an ADR for a trivial decision	Only when all 3 conditions met
CONTEXT.md gained implementation details	It is a glossary, nothing more
Asked the user something the code could answer	Explore the codebase instead
PRD not updated after interview	Update docs/prd/PRD-NNNN-<title>.md and set Status to Grilled before declaring complete
Declared complete without the exhaustiveness gate	Run the 5-point gate first
Parent Issue body stale after grill changed scope	Sync the parent Issue (if ## Issue field present) — reflect sharpened terms, scope, ADRs; don't change title or close

Output

Grill complete.

Resolved <N> items:
- <term>: <resolution>
- <assumption>: <validated/converted>
- <decision>: <ADR created | recorded in PRD>

Updated:
- docs/prd/PRD-NNNN-<title>.md — Status → Grilled
- CONTEXT.md — <count> terms sharpened/added
- docs/adr/<NNNN>-<title>.md — created (if any)

Exhaustiveness gate: passed
Parent Issue: #<num> synced | ⚠️ missing (/think didn't create one) | skipped (no parent, direct /story path)

Next: /story to break PRD into Issues | /think if scope changed significantly