^^
Look at it this way, any given challenge can be broken into Objective, Approach and Style.
Objective is generally non-negotiable, and fairly obvious. If its not obvious, make it obvious to the GM or your skills won't matter jack as he gives you results you didn't want because he doesn't know what you want.
Approach is how you do it. This is important part of minimum roleplaying. Approaches can be broken down further into further objectives. You have the following levels:
-Declare action and roll. Zero effort, no immersion. Physically it might be "I cross the crevasse with my acrobatics", Socially "I convince him to let me pass", Mentally "Do I know the answer?". The GM would also find it difficult to reward a good roll even, with little to work on.
-Declare action, approach and then roll. Some degree of effort involved. "I cross the crevasse by swinging across on the rope/climbing up the walls", "I make him think I'm a legit messenger", "Find out this creature's relation to a dragon". Based on the approach, the difficulty might be better or worse, and you can break the challenge down into sub challenges to identify an ideal approach(like using a knowledge skill to work out likely weaknesses, or related information)
-Make use of an edge you know of. Self explanatory, if you have identified an easier path, use it.
Style, meanwhile is what many think of as the 'roleplaying' of it, as they narrate the action, talk the debate, act it out etc. This gets points for immersion, but shouldn't be required.