Grill Me: Technical Proposal Review

A technical plan can look sensible and still fail in production. Get a direct, evidence-based critique that exposes weak assumptions, separates blockers from manageable risks, and gives you concrete next actions.

What it does

• Pressure-tests decisions: Reviews implementation plans, architecture, pull requests, migrations, and rollouts.
• Checks available evidence: Uses code, tests, logs, configuration, and documentation to assess whether concerns hold up.
• Surfaces practical risks: Examines failure modes, ownership gaps, rollback options, performance, and unnecessary complexity.
• Clarifies the decision: Delivers a clear verdict with specific constraints, checks, or changes to consider.

How it works

1. Share the proposal, pull request, design document, or technical decision you want challenged.
2. Provide relevant files or evidence when available, and state any scope limits.
3. Ask for a critique, then use the findings to decide what to validate or change before proceeding.

Works with

Designed for Codex reviews of technical proposals and accessible repository materials, including source code, tests, configuration files, logs, and design documents.

Why use this skill

It helps you focus review time on objections that could actually change the decision. It also checks for evidence against its own concerns, reducing speculative criticism and unnecessary rework.

Use cases

• Check a migration plan before committing engineering time.
• Review a pull request for production failure modes.
• Challenge whether a proposed abstraction is worth maintaining.

Known limitations

This is a critique tool, not an implementation service. Claims about current behavior depend on access to relevant evidence; unavailable details remain unverified.