@solaqua/ghosts 0.2.1 → 0.2.2

package/engineering/skills/grill-me/README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+# Grill Me
+
+An interview that stress-tests a plan, decision, or idea through question rounds
+ordered by their dependencies, ending with a short, grouped decision summary.
+
+## Credits
+
+Shout-out to [Matt Pocock](https://github.com/mattpocock) for the original
+[grilling skill](https://github.com/mattpocock/skills/blob/main/skills/productivity/grilling/SKILL.md).
+This adaptation keeps its interview flow and adds guidance for a concise,
+readable result summary.

package/engineering/skills/grill-me/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,66 @@
+---
+name: grill-me
+description: Grill the user relentlessly about a plan, decision, or idea. Use when the user wants to stress-test their thinking or asks to be grilled.
+---
+
+Interview the user relentlessly until you reach a shared understanding. Map
+this as a design tree: every decision branches into the decisions that depend
+on it.
+
+Work the tree in rounds. The frontier is every decision whose prerequisites
+are already settled: questions you can ask now without guessing at answers you
+have not heard yet. Ask the whole frontier in one round, number each question,
+and give your recommended answer. Then wait for the user's answers.
+
+Format a round like this:
+
+```md
+❓ **Q1** - **<Question title>**: <Question, with choices when useful>
+
+➡️ <Recommended answer>
+
+---
+
+❓ **Q2** - **<Question title>**: <Question, with choices when useful>
+
+➡️ <Recommended answer>
+```
+
+Each round reshapes the tree. Settled decisions unblock their dependent
+questions; recompute the frontier and ask the next round. A question depending
+on another question still open in this round belongs to a later round.
+
+Finding facts is your job, never the user's. When a question needs a fact from
+the environment, dispatch a subagent to find it. A running exploration is an
+unsettled prerequisite: only downstream questions wait; ask the rest of the
+frontier now. The decisions are the user's: put each to them and wait.
+
+The session is done when every branch within scope is resolved and nothing
+remains silently assumed. An empty frontier while research is pending is not
+completion. Do not act until the user confirms the shared understanding.
+
+Present the result using this template in the user's language. Replace
+placeholders, repeat decision groups as needed, and omit constraints when none:
+
+```md
+## Outcome
+
+<Agreed goal and direction in 1–2 sentences>
+
+## Decisions
+
+### <Related decision group>
+
+- <Agreed choice and its key reason or accepted trade-off>
+
+## Constraints
+
+- <Material scope boundary or constraint>
+
+Does this capture our shared understanding?
+```
+
+Keep it readable in one screen without scrolling. Include only what someone
+needs to understand the result; omit the interview transcript, question IDs,
+and full decision tree. Use a compact table or diagram only when it makes the
+decisions easier to understand.

package/engineering/skills/loop-plan/SKILL.md

@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ fixed ceremony.
 ```text
 [Understand] → [Route unknowns]
                   ├─ evidence → [$loop-research] ┐
-                  ├─ user decision → [$socratic-interview] ├→ [Frame + ledger] → [Draft]
+                  ├─ user decision → [$grill-me] ├→ [Frame + ledger] → [Draft]
                   └─ known →─────────────────────┘              ↓
                                                      [Any high-impact uncertainty?]
                                                        ├─ No → [Self challenge]
@@ -136,20 +136,20 @@ Route unresolved inputs before making design decisions. Use `$loop-research` for
 repository or document investigation, current or contested evidence,
 comparisons, feasibility checks, or source citations; it returns verified
 claims, provenance, uncertainty, and leads that could change the plan. Use
-`$socratic-interview` for choices only the user can make, such as outcome,
-scope, priority, risk tolerance, or external action; it asks one focused
-question at a time and returns an execution brief, but does not plan or edit.
-Do not ask the user for facts inspection or research can establish, and do not
-replace a user decision with an inferred preference. Carry both outputs into
-the decision ledger.
-
-Ask the smallest question when an unknown could change scope, success, or a
-costly decision; continue independent inspection while waiting. State ordinary
-assumptions and proceed. If feasibility remains unestablished, put the cheapest
-useful investigation first with a decision criterion and keep dependent work
-conditional rather than inventing certainty. State task-specific principles,
-rank decision drivers, resolve conflicts explicitly, and define observable
-success before choosing.
+`$grill-me` for choices only the user can make, such as outcome, scope, priority,
+risk tolerance, or external action. It asks the whole ready frontier in each
+round and returns a short, grouped decision summary. Wait for the user to confirm
+the shared understanding before carrying its decisions into the plan. Do not
+ask the user for facts that inspection or research can establish, or infer a
+material preference. Carry both outputs into the decision ledger.
+
+Resolve material user choices through the interview's dependency-aware rounds;
+continue independent inspection while waiting. State ordinary assumptions only
+when they do not replace a material user decision. If feasibility remains
+unestablished, put the cheapest useful investigation first with a decision
+criterion and keep dependent work conditional rather than inventing certainty.
+State task-specific principles, rank decision drivers, resolve conflicts
+explicitly, and define observable success before choosing.
 
 ## Compare and draft
 

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "@solaqua/ghosts",
-  "version": "0.2.1",
+  "version": "0.2.2",
   "description": "Reusable agent skills and reviewers.",
   "license": "MIT",
   "repository": {

package/engineering/skills/socratic-interview/SKILL.md

@@ -1,22 +0,0 @@
----
-name: socratic-interview
-description: Conduct a Socratic interview to resolve only material uncertainty, then provide a concise execution brief.
-disable-model-invocation: true
----
-
-Conduct a Socratic interview only when missing information could materially change the outcome, scope, behavior, safety, cost, or external action. Inspect context first and make normal in-scope assumptions when sufficient.
-
-Ask the smallest useful question, one at a time. Do not collect background that will not change the work. Stop when remaining uncertainty is immaterial; state assumptions and proceed unless doing so could cause an unwanted or costly result.
-
-Do not plan, implement, create tasks, write specs, or edit files during the interview.
-
-When sufficient, summarize only the decisions needed to execute:
-
-```md
-# Execution Brief
-
-- Outcome:
-- Decisions:
-- Scope and constraints:
-- Assumptions:
-```