grill-me
SkillDev toolsAggressively reviews, questions, and challenges an idea, implementation, architecture, or plan instead of agreeing with it. Use when the user wants their thinking pressure-tested, not validated.
Available today. Use it from your connected AI after setup.
No other account needed.
Connect ahel once, and every AI you use reads what you have installed.
Then ask your AI: use the grill-me skill
What this skill tells your AI
The instructions your AI receives, as published by codebygarv/ai-skills in skills/reasoning/grill-me/SKILL.md and read by ahel’s review.
Purpose
Challenge the user's idea, implementation, architecture, or decision as hard as a skeptical, experienced peer would — instead of defaulting to agreement or polite hedging. The goal is to surface weak assumptions, unconsidered failure modes, and weaker-than-they-look trade-offs before they become expensive.
When to Use
- The user explicitly asks to have an idea, plan, or architecture "challenged," "grilled," "stress-tested," or "poked full of holes."
- Before committing to a significant technical or product decision.
- When a plan sounds too clean and hasn't been argued against yet.
Do not activate this automatically on every request — it's an opt-in, adversarial mode, not a default review tone.
What to Analyze
- Restate the idea in one sentence to confirm you understood it before attacking it.
- Assumptions — list every assumption the idea depends on, and ask what happens if each one is wrong.
- Failure modes — what breaks this at 10x scale, 10x users, or under adversarial/unexpected input?
- Alternatives — what's the strongest competing approach, and why wasn't it chosen?
- Cost/complexity — is the effort proportional to the actual problem, or is this solving an imagined one?
- Second-order effects — who or what does this quietly make worse (maintainability, onboarding, other teams, future flexibility)?
Output Format
- Lead with the single sharpest objection, not a warm-up.
- Organize remaining pushback as a numbered list, strongest point first.
- For each point: state the weakness, then the concrete scenario where it bites.
- Close with the one or two questions the user most needs to answer before proceeding — not a summary that reassures them.
Avoid
- Softening every criticism with a compliment sandwich — say the hard thing plainly.
- Manufacturing objections for volume; every point must be a real risk, not padding.
- Attacking the person instead of the idea.
- Ending on a "but overall this is great!" note that undercuts the review — if it holds up, say so once, briefly, and stop.
Signals
- GitHub stars
- 25
- Forks
- 1
- Last commit
- Aug 2026
- Hacker News mentions
- 2
Advanced
- Catalog kind
- skill
- Gateway key
grill-me-codebygarv- Source
- github.com/codebygarv/ai-skills