Skip to content

Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.

@MarlonPassos-git
Last active June 8, 2026 19:30
Show Gist options
  • Select an option

  • Save MarlonPassos-git/36dcc86e8fe44532e43ea1c13142160a to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.

Select an option

Save MarlonPassos-git/36dcc86e8fe44532e43ea1c13142160a to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
grill-me-codex

grill-me-codex

Small Codex skills for better planning with request_user_input.

This is a tiny adaptation of the grill-me workflow for Codex.

The goal is simple: make Codex ask better planning questions before writing code, without forcing you into a heavier workflow like a full spec system.

Why

I liked the original grill-me idea because it is short, practical, and does not lock me into a complex architecture.

But in Codex, I wanted two changes:

  1. Ask 1–3 questions at a time instead of only one.
  2. Use request_user_input so the questions appear in Codex’s native UI.

Codex config

In my setup, I use the following config to enable the ask tool outside Plan Mode:

[features]
default_mode_request_user_input = true

Notes

This is not meant to replace every planning workflow.

For me, it replaces most of the value I wanted from Plan Mode when I need Codex to challenge my idea before building.

name grill-me
description Interview the user relentlessly about a plan or design until reaching shared understanding, resolving each branch of the decision tree. Use when user wants to stress-test a plan, get grilled on their design, or mentions "grill me".
user-invocable true
disable-model-invocation true

Interview me relentlessly about every aspect of this plan until we reach a 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 1 to 3 questions at a time using request_user_input, waiting for feedback on each batch before continuing.

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

name grill-with-docs
description Grilling session that challenges your plan against the existing domain model, sharpens terminology, and updates documentation (CONTEXT.md, ADRs) inline as decisions crystallise. Use when user wants to stress-test a plan against their project's language and documented decisions.
user-invocable true
disable-model-invocation true

Interview me relentlessly about every aspect of this plan until we reach a 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 1 to 3 questions at a time with the tool request_user_input, waiting for feedback on each question before continuing.

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

Domain awareness

During codebase exploration, also look for existing documentation:

File structure

Most repos have a single context:

/
├── CONTEXT.md
├── docs/
│   └── adr/
│       ├── 0001-event-sourced-orders.md
│       └── 0002-postgres-for-write-model.md
└── src/

If a CONTEXT-MAP.md exists at the root, the repo has multiple contexts. The map points to where each one lives:

/
├── CONTEXT-MAP.md
├── docs/
│   └── adr/                          ← system-wide decisions
├── src/
│   ├── ordering/
│   │   ├── CONTEXT.md
│   │   └── docs/adr/                 ← context-specific decisions
│   └── billing/
│       ├── CONTEXT.md
│       └── docs/adr/

Create files lazily — only when you have something to write. If no CONTEXT.md exists, create one when the first term is resolved. If no docs/adr/ exists, create it when the first ADR is needed.

During the session

Challenge against the glossary

When the user uses a term that conflicts with the existing language in CONTEXT.md, call it out immediately. "Your glossary defines 'cancellation' as X, but you seem to mean Y — which is it?"

Sharpen fuzzy language

When the user uses vague or overloaded terms, propose a precise canonical term. "You're saying 'account' — do you mean the Customer or the User? Those are different things."

Discuss concrete scenarios

When domain relationships are being discussed, stress-test them with specific scenarios. Invent scenarios that probe edge cases and force the user to be precise about the boundaries between concepts.

Cross-reference with code

When the user states how something works, check whether the code agrees. If you find a contradiction, surface it: "Your code cancels entire Orders, but you just said partial cancellation is possible — which is right?"

Update CONTEXT.md inline

When a term is resolved, update CONTEXT.md right there. Don't batch these up — capture them as they happen. Use the format in CONTEXT-FORMAT.md.

CONTEXT.md should be totally devoid of implementation details. Do not treat CONTEXT.md as a spec, a scratch pad, or a repository for implementation decisions. It is a glossary and nothing else.

Offer ADRs sparingly

Only offer to create an ADR when all three are true:

  1. Hard to reverse — the cost of changing your mind later is meaningful
  2. Surprising without context — a future reader will wonder "why did they do it this way?"
  3. The result of a real trade-off — there were genuine alternatives and you picked one for specific reasons

If any of the three is missing, skip the ADR. Use the format in ADR-FORMAT.md.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment