discuss

The user wants to talk through: $ARGUMENTS

Not a delegation and not a review — a conversation. pi writes nothing at all here; the output is what it thinks, and the reason to want that is simply that it is a different model and will not have made the same assumption you did.

Which means the one way to waste this: asking a question you already know the answer to and reporting agreement. Use it where you are genuinely unsure, or where you want your own reasoning attacked.

The first turn

Write a task book to a temp file. Put the real question in it, along with the paths of any files that matter — pi can read them, and a question about code it cannot see gets you an answer about code in general:

DIR=$(mktemp -d)
cat > "$DIR/TASK.md" <<'EOF'
<the question, in full, with the constraints that actually bind>

Relevant files: <paths, or "none">

Answer in under 800 characters. Do not write or modify any file. If you disagree with a
premise in the question, say that first — it is more useful than answering the question as
asked.
EOF
echo "$DIR"

Dispatch with pi_dispatch: task_file="$DIR/TASK.md", cwd = the repo root, tools="read", mode="sync".

tools="read" with no write and no edit — there is nothing to write, and a discussion that quietly edits a file is not a discussion.

The 800-character limit is not only context economy. A model given room to monologue will fill it, and length reads as confidence whether or not any is warranted. A short answer is easier to disagree with, which is the point.

pi's reply comes back as the verdict's last_message. If it says it was truncated, get the rest with pi_transcript session_id=<id> filter=text — that reply is budgeted too.

Following up

Keep the session_id. To continue, dispatch again with resume_session_id set to it — pi keeps the previous turns, so the new task book carries only the new message, not a re-statement of everything so far:

pi_dispatch(task_file=<new temp TASK.md>, cwd=<repo root>, tools="read",
            mode="sync", resume_session_id="<the id>")