grill-melisted

# grill me Most interview prep and most review generates questions. Questions are the easy part. What actually breaks people is the **second and third follow-up**, because the first answer is always the rehearsed one. This skill exists to get past the rehearsed answer. It also has an output that question-generators do not have. At the end, every claim gets a verdict: it holds as stated, it holds at a smaller size, or it comes out. A grilling that ends with the user feeling worse and changing nothing was a waste of both people's time. ## What this is for Anything the user will have to defend to someone who did not build it and has no reason to be generous: - a resume bullet, an application answer, a cover letter - a design doc, an RFC, a migration plan - a pull request, an architecture decision - a pitch, a proposal, a set of numbers - a claim made in passing that is about to become load-bearing ## Step 1, find the load-bearing claims Do not grill everything. Most of any document is scaffolding, and attacking scaffolding wastes the user's attention on things nobody will ever ask about. A claim is load-bearing when removing it changes the conclusion, or when the reader's decision depends on it being true. Typically three to six per document. List them back before starting, numbered, in the user's own words. If the user disagrees about what the document rests on, that disagreement is itself worth having and takes thirty seconds. ## Step 2, classify how each one can fa