docs: drop the forced code-review neighbour from where-it-fits

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

.changeset/docs-grill-me-pass.md

@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+---
+"mattpocock-skills": patch
+---
+
+Rewrite the `grill-me` docs page around what people actually get wrong.
+
+The old page explained the mechanism — rounds, the frontier, the decision tree — and stopped there. Every recurring question from the last few months went unanswered on it: which of the three grilling skills to reach for, how many questions is normal, what to do when a question can't be answered by talking, and whether to start a fresh session before writing the spec.
+
+The rewrite keeps the mechanism short and spends the page on the judgement calls instead:
+
+- **Sibling routing** is now a three-way list keyed on what you have in front of you — no codebase, a codebase, or too big for one session — rather than a paragraph.
+- **"It's a conversation, not an interview"** names passivity as the main failure mode. A session where you answer "agreed" forty times produces a plan you didn't write and can't defend.
+- **"Grillable and ungrillable"** gives readers the move for a question that talking cannot settle: stop, prototype, come back. This is where long sessions come from.
+- **A "Common questions" section** answers the six highest-volume ones directly, including how to restore one-question-at-a-time and why you should not clear context before `to-spec`.
+- **"It's working if"** added, led by the sharpest signal: if you never disagreed, you didn't need the session.
+
+Also drops the "plan mode" ambiguity by saying plainly to leave it off.

.changeset/docs-writing-for-agents-pass.md

@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+---
+"mattpocock-skills": patch
+---
+
+Rewrite the `writing-for-agents` docs page around what people actually get wrong.
+
+The old page was a table of contents for the skill: the two loads, then a bullet per lever. It answered none of the questions the rename and the AMA threads have been generating for months — where `writing-great-skills` went, whether the agent or the human is doing the writing, why you shouldn't just ask Claude to write the skill for you, and how you know when a document is done.
+
+The rewrite keeps the levers to one compact list and spends the page on the judgement calls instead:
+
+- **The defining constraint is now stated up front** — the default move is deletion, not explanation, because the reader has already read everything. This is also the answer to "why not let the model write it", so it leads.
+- **The scope is stated as a test**, not a list: does an agent read this document and act? Skills, `AGENTS.md`, specs, tickets and runtime prompts all pass it.
+- **A "Common questions" section** answers the nine highest-volume ones directly, including the rename, the "streamline" failure where an agent trims for length and cuts behaviour, whether to rewrite documents per model, the skill that only works on the one task it was built from, and the leading-word question from non-native English speakers.
+- **"It's working if"** added, led by the sharpest signal: the document gets shorter as it gets better, and duplication is the most reliable sign it was never tested.
+- **`Where it fits`** says plainly that it has no chain neighbour: it sits underneath the set rather than beside one skill, and the documents the other skills leave behind are the text it governs.

docs/productivity/grill-me.md

@@ -2,22 +2,77 @@
 
 ## What it does
 
-`grill-me` runs a relentless interview about a plan or design, walking every branch of the decision tree until you and the agent reach a **shared understanding**.
+`grill-me` takes a **loose idea** and interviews you until it has real decisions in it. You do not need a worked-out plan to start — producing one is what the session is for. It asks in **rounds**: each round is the whole **frontier** — every question whose prerequisites you have already settled — so you are never asked something that hinges on an answer it hasn't heard yet.
 
-It asks in **rounds** and waits. A round is the whole **frontier** — every decision whose prerequisites are already settled — put to you as one numbered list, so you're never asked something that hinges on an answer the agent hasn't heard yet. Where a question can be answered by reading the codebase, it goes and reads rather than asking. Each question comes with the agent's own recommended answer, so you are reacting to a proposal, not staring at a blank prompt.
+It is **stateless**. It writes no files and leaves no workspace behind. The only thing it leaves is a sharper version of the idea, in your own head.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
-You invoke this by typing `/grill-me` — the agent won't reach for it on its own.
+You invoke this by typing `/grill-me` — the agent won't reach for it on its own. Start it in a **fresh conversation**, not on top of a plan you already had an agent write.
 
-Reach for it before you build, when a plan feels roughly right but you can sense unresolved decisions hiding in it — the moment you want the soft spots found and forced into the open. If you want that same interrogation to also leave a paper trail of ADRs and a glossary behind, use [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) instead. And if the effort is too big to hold in one session and the route to the goal is still foggy — a greenfield project, a huge feature build — start further upstream with [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder), which charts it as a map of decisions first and then merges back into this flow.
+Reach for it as soon as you have an idea worth taking seriously — a feature, a product direction, a business call, a piece of writing — and long before you have worked out what it involves. Vagueness is not a reason to wait; it is the thing the session eats. If you can already specify the thing precisely, you don't need to grill it.
 
-## The decision tree
+Which of the three grilling skills you want depends on what is in front of you:
 
-The session walks the plan as a tree of decisions, settling a parent decision before the choices that hang off it. Your answers reshape the tree and push the frontier outward, so the next round asks whatever they unblocked. The point is not to reach agreement quickly; it is to make every implicit call explicit, so nothing important is left silently assumed. You come out the other side with a plan whose branches have all been visited.
+- **Anything, anywhere** — `grill-me`. It needs no repo and writes no files, and the subject doesn't have to be code.
+- **A codebase to align against** — [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs). The same interview, but stateful: it reads your code and keeps what it learns in `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs.
+- **Too big for one session** — [wayfinder](https://aihero.dev/skills-wayfinder). It charts the effort as a map and runs grilling sessions inside it.
 
-`grill-me` is **stateless**: it writes nothing and leaves no workspace behind. It runs anywhere, and the only artifact is the sharpened understanding in the conversation itself. That is the deliberate contrast with [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs), which captures the same interview as durable ADRs and a glossary.
+Leave plan mode off. Plan mode primes the agent to rush toward producing a plan, which is the opposite of staying in inquiry.
+
+## It's a conversation, not an interview
+
+The skill asks the questions, but **you** own the scope. That is the part people miss, and it separates a session that turns an idea into decisions from one that produces confident nonsense.
+
+The failure mode is **passivity** — answering "agreed, agreed, agreed" for forty questions and coming out with a plan the agent wrote and you nodded at. It feels productive because it was long. Nothing was actually decided, and the result carries a certainty it hasn't earned.
+
+Being active means steering. Push back on a question pitched beneath the fidelity you need. Say when the scope is drifting. Answer "I don't know" and mean it. This skill is built to aid an engineer, not to replace one: what comes out tracks the quality of your answers, not the number of questions asked.
+
+The opposite error is real but rarer — staying in the interview so long you never reach code.
+
+## Grillable and ungrillable
+
+Some questions can be answered by talking. Others can't, and no amount of grilling will get you there.
+
+"One long form or three pages?" and "how should this interaction feel?" are **ungrillable** — they need something to react to. When you hit one, stop grilling. Build the throwaway version with [prototype](https://aihero.dev/skills-prototype), look at it, then come back and answer in one line.
+
+Talking your way through an ungrillable question is where sessions balloon. The agent keeps rephrasing, you keep guessing, and the scope grows to fill the uncertainty.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- You disagree with something. A session with no pushback from you is a session you didn't need.
+- Questions arrive in a few rounds rather than one long drip, and later rounds clearly build on what you said earlier.
+- You end up somewhere you didn't expect, because a question surfaced a decision you had been making implicitly.
+- At the end you could defend each choice to someone who wasn't there.
+
+## Common questions
+
+**How many questions should I expect, and how do I know when it ends?**
+Count rounds, not questions. Forty-six questions across four rounds is an ordinary session. It ends when the frontier is empty — every branch visited, nothing left silently assumed.
+
+**It asked me two hundred questions. What went wrong?**
+Usually the scope was too large. Ask the agent to break the work into smaller pieces first, then grill each one. Very long sessions also drift into the **dumb zone**, where the context window is full enough that the questions get worse.
+
+**Can I go back to one question at a time?**
+Yes. Add this to your global `CLAUDE.md`:
+
+```
+When grilling, ask one question at a time.
+```
+
+**What if I genuinely don't know the answer?**
+Say so. "I don't know" is a real answer, and a question you can't answer is usually a sign to prototype rather than to guess.
+
+**Do I start a fresh session before writing the spec?**
+No. The value of the session is the context you just built. Hand the same conversation straight to [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec).
+
+**Does the model matter?**
+More than for most skills. Grilling leans on the model's own sense of how systems break, so give it your best one. Implementation mostly follows context and tolerates a cheaper model.
 
 ## Where it fits
 
-`grill-me` is a reach-for-it-anytime standalone — the pre-build stress test you run whenever a plan needs hardening. It is the stateless, user-invoked front door to the [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) primitive; its closest neighbour is [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs), the stateful sibling that runs the same interview but additionally records the decisions as ADRs and a glossary. If the outcome is a spec you want written down, hand off to [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec), which synthesises the settled understanding into a spec without re-interviewing you. When you're unsure which flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.
+`grill-me` is a **standalone you can run anywhere, on anything**. Being stateless is what makes it portable: no repo, no workspace, no setup, and no assumption that the idea is even about software. People point it at business decisions, at writing, at what to do next — anything that won't sit still in their head.
+
+That portability is the whole difference from [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs), which runs the same interview but reads a codebase to align against and records what it learns as `CONTEXT.md` and ADRs. Both sit on the [grilling](https://aihero.dev/skills-grilling) primitive; `grill-me` is the user-invoked front door that carries nothing with it.
+
+If what you grilled does turn out to be software, you can hand the same conversation to [to-spec](https://aihero.dev/skills-to-spec) and carry on into the build flow — an option, not the point of the skill. When you're unsure which flow fits, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you.

docs/productivity/writing-for-agents.md

@@ -2,31 +2,71 @@
 
 ## What it does
 
-`writing-for-agents` is the reference you write agent-facing documents against — skills, `AGENTS.md` / `CLAUDE.md`, and any doc an agent reaches by a pointer. The packaging differs; the writing does not: the same levers make each one predictable, so the agent takes the same *process* every run rather than producing the same output.
+`writing-for-agents` is the reference you write agent-facing documents against — a skill, an `AGENTS.md` / `CLAUDE.md`, a spec, a runtime prompt, a README, any doc an agent reads. The packaging differs; the writing does not: the same levers make each one predictable, so the agent takes the same *process* every run rather than producing the same output.
 
-Formerly `writing-great-skills`. The rename tracks what the reference always was underneath: almost none of it is skill-specific. The universal core — context pointers, the two loads, the information hierarchy, completion criteria, leading words, pruning — applies to any document an agent consumes; the genuinely skill-only mechanics (frontmatter, the model- vs user-invoked choice, router skills) are disclosed to a linked `SKILL-MECHANICS.md` you read only when the document you're writing is a skill.
+Its default move is deletion, not explanation. Ask an agent to write instructions for another agent and it spends most of its words explaining what the model already knows — every one of those lines is a **no-op**, paying context and changing no behaviour. This reference is the lens that finds them, which is why it earns its keep at least as often on a document you already have as on a blank file.
+
+It was called `writing-great-skills` until v1.1. The rename tracks what it always was underneath: almost none of it is skill-specific. The skill-only mechanics — frontmatter, the model- versus user-invoked choice, router skills — are disclosed to a linked `SKILL-MECHANICS.md` you read only when the document in front of you is a skill.
 
 ## When to reach for it
 
-The agent reaches for it on its own whenever you're creating or editing a skill, or modifying `AGENTS.md` or `CLAUDE.md` — and you can still type `/writing-for-agents` to pull it up directly.
+Type `/writing-for-agents`, or the agent reaches for it on its own when you're creating or editing a skill, or modifying `AGENTS.md` or `CLAUDE.md`.
+
+Reach for it by hand for everything else an agent reads: your docs, specs and tickets, system and AFK prompts. The test is one question — does an agent read this? — and it does not matter how the document gets in front of it, whether a pointer names it, a human pastes it, or it simply sits in the repo. For working out what a codebase actually contains in the first place, use [grill-with-docs](https://aihero.dev/skills-grill-with-docs) — this reference governs how a document reads, not what it knows.
 
 ## The two loads
 
-The concept the whole reference turns on is a pair of budgets every document and pointer spends:
+The idea the whole reference turns on is a pair of budgets every document and pointer spends:
 
 - **Context load** — the cost of always-loaded material on the agent's window: an `AGENTS.md` line, a skill description, anything sitting in context every turn whether or not it fires.
-- **Cognitive load** — the cost on the human: which documents exist and when to reach for each. You are the index. Not a cost to minimise — it's the price of human agency.
+- **Cognitive load** — the cost on you: which documents exist, and when to reach for each. You are the index. Not a cost to minimise — it is the price of human agency.
 
-Once you're thinking in these two loads, most authoring decisions — split or don't, inline or disclose, point or push — become the same trade made in different places.
+Once you think in these two loads, most authoring decisions — split or don't, inline or disclose, point or push — become the same trade made in different places.
 
-## The other levers
+## The levers
 
-- **Context pointers** — the reference held in context that names out-of-context material and encodes when to reach it. A skill description and an `AGENTS.md` line pointing at a doc are the same object; the pointer's *wording*, not its target, decides when and how reliably the agent reaches through it.
+- **Context pointers** — the reference held in context that names out-of-context material and encodes when to reach it. A skill description and an `AGENTS.md` line naming a doc are the same object; the pointer's *wording*, not its target, decides how reliably the agent reaches through it.
-- **Information hierarchy** — the ladder from in-file step, to in-file reference, to disclosed reference behind a pointer. **Progressive disclosure** is the move down that ladder so the top stays legible; **co-location** decides what sits beside each piece once placed.
+- **Information hierarchy** — the ladder from in-file step, to in-file reference, to disclosed reference behind a pointer. **Progressive disclosure** is the move down that ladder so the top stays legible.
-- **Completion criteria** — the clarity and demand of each step's done-condition, and the **legwork** it drives; the defence against **premature completion**.
+- **Completion criteria** — the clarity and demand of each step's done-condition, and the **legwork** that demand drives; the defence against **premature completion**.
-- **Leading words** — a compact concept already in the model's pretraining (*tight*, *red*, *tracer bullet*) that the agent thinks with while running the document; hunt restatements a single word can retire.
+- **Leading words** — a compact concept already in the model's pretraining (*tight*, *red*, *tracer bullet*) that the agent thinks with while running the document. It anchors twice: execution in the body, invocation in the pointer.
-- **Pruning** — single source of truth, relevance, and the no-op test applied sentence by sentence, against **sediment** and **sprawl**. Single source of truth reaches past the document into the environment: a doc restating what's already in `package.json`, a config file, or `--help` output is a **cache** of a lookup that was never expensive, and it's the copy that goes stale. Cache what the agent can't find by looking — the unwritten convention, the reason behind a choice.
+- **Pruning** — single source of truth, relevance, and the no-op test applied sentence by sentence, against **duplication**, **sediment** and **sprawl**.
+
+## Common questions
+
+**Where did `/writing-great-skills` go?**
+It is this skill, renamed in v1.1. Practitioners were already pointing it at `AGENTS.md`, docs, specs, tickets and runtime prompts long before the name caught up; structure, leading words and pruning turn out to be the craft of any text an agent reads. There is no alias — reinstall under the new name.
+
+**"Writing for agents" — so the agent does the writing?**
+The other way round. You are the author; the agent is the reader. That is the whole difficulty of the genre: you are writing for a reader who has already read everything, so explanation is waste and precision is the entire job.
+
+**Can't I just ask the agent to write it for me?**
+You can, and it will produce something verbose. Left alone the model explains what it already knows, and it will not apply the no-op test or reach for a leading word on its own. Use the reference on the draft — a review pass is where most of its value lands.
+
+**I asked an agent to trim a document and it cut the functionality.**
+Agents told to "streamline" optimise for length, because length is the thing they can see. The no-op test is behavioural, not aesthetic: delete the line and ask whether the agent's behaviour changed. When a sentence fails, delete the whole sentence rather than trim words from it — and settle a disagreement about it by running the document, not by arguing.
+
+**How do I know when it's done?**
+When it works, and you can no longer find duplication, sediment or no-ops. There is no automated eval here; the check is a manual run plus the failure-mode vocabulary as a diagnostic. When a document misbehaves, that vocabulary is also the repair kit — name the failure mode first, then fix that.
+
+**Should this live in `CLAUDE.md` or somewhere else?**
+Ask which load you want to pay. `CLAUDE.md` loads into every session unconditionally; material behind a pointer costs only the pointer's own line until it fires. Anything that applies in one context out of ten is paying context load the nine other times.
+
+**Do I need to rewrite my documents for each new model?**
+Mostly no, and over-fitting to one model is its own trap. Updating for a new model is usually another no-op pass rather than a rewrite.
+
+**My skill only works on the exact task I built it from.**
+The common route — do the work once, then have the agent write it up as a skill — over-indexes on that one run, and the exemplars come out too specific. Keep the run as evidence, then abstract deliberately: strip what belonged to that repo and those files, and write for the class of task.
+
+**English isn't my first language. Do I lose the leading-word advantage?**
+No — finding the word that packs the most behaviour into the fewest tokens is work the reference does for you. It is one of the things it is for.
+
+## It's working if
+
+- The document gets shorter as it gets better, and you are surprised how little is left.
+- You can point at a leading word and watch it doing work in more than one place.
+- Nothing is stated twice, in any form. Duplication is the most reliable sign a document was never tested.
+- Reference that only one branch needs sits behind a pointer rather than in the main file.
 
 ## Where it fits
 
-This is a reach-for-it-anytime standalone reference — the meta-skill you consult while building the rest of the set, not a step in a chain. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits a task, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you over the whole set.
+This is a reach-for-it-anytime standalone reference. It has no neighbour in the chain because it sits underneath the whole set rather than beside any one skill: every skill here was written against it, and the documents the other skills leave behind — a `CONTEXT.md` and its ADRs, a spec, a ticket — are exactly the text it governs once an agent has to read them. When you're unsure which skill or flow fits a task, [ask-matt](https://aihero.dev/skills-ask-matt) routes you over the whole set.