# Grill with Docs

Read this internal Workbench procedure when the user requests a document-grounded Grill or material gaps in the supplied documents need decisions before dependent work. Ordinary factual questions and settled decisions need no Grill. This is packaged LLM guidance, not an ATTACHIE or a separately installed Skill.

## Read, question, record

1. Start from the actual goal, supplied documents and settled decisions. Read relevant context and resolve factual unknowns yourself from authorized sources. Bring the user decisions, not questions the documents already answer. Cite a heading or line when it helps establish a contradiction or disputed claim, not mechanically for every question.
2. Reuse the task's existing Grill record. Otherwise start one at `.pi-tmp/context/grills/<topic>/GRILL.md` in the project. Keep the goal and bounds, confirmed decisions and material open points there; no additional plan, glossary or ADR is required. Append entries using shell append (`>>`); read the record only to restore context.
3. Choose one material open issue whose dependencies are resolved. Explain its practical consequence and give a reasoned recommendation when a decision needs one. Ask one focused question, then wait. Resolve ambiguity before moving on; preserve settled decisions unless new evidence justifies reopening them. Follow applicable native conversation Skills without starting a second process or record.
4. Append the answer and resulting decision concisely, updating open points through new entries. Record sources and reasons where they explain the decision. Suggestions stay separate from confirmed requirements. Pause only work that depends on an unresolved issue; continue independently authorized work without another approval round.
5. Close when the material issues are resolved or explicitly deferred, or the user stops. Append the agreed outcome, remaining blockers and next step; return a short summary and the record path. Do not manufacture questions to prolong the Grill.

**Done when** the agreed requirements and remaining open points are traceable in one usable record. The record does not itself rewrite the source documents or authorize implementation; use existing grants for subsequent work and ask only for genuinely missing scope.