I don’t know if this is true (it is, after all, only my story), but it seems that inquiry allows for a gentle unfolding.
With many other approaches, it may not be possible to do it “too much” (what would that mean?), but it is definitely possible to do enough for there to be a serious backlash. And that can be quite unpleasant, while also carry some opportunities for insights and maturation.
But with inquiry, I only look at what is true for me (first person singular) in the present. What is alive for me right now? There is a gentle curiosity and receptivity in inquiry, which allows the unfolding to occur in an organic and gently paced way.
Inquiry works with what is already there, just noticing what is already there. Nothing is imposed. Nothing is added. Nothing is pushed.
Unless, of course, something is imposed, added and/or pushed. When that happens for me, I see that it often comes from an idea of a “goal” besides or beyond just seeing more clearly what is true for me in the present. When there is the belief in an idea of a goal – such as relief from suffering, realizing selflessness, being a good spiritual student, being insightful and so on – it brings discomfort. And this discomfort is an invitation to bring this belief itself into inquiry, and see what is really true for me there. Do I really want an abstract goal, however compelling it may seem? Or do I want to see more clearly what is really there, what is true for me right now?