Resolve the target and the user's actual done outcome from the current request, conversation, handoff, plan, repo, or live surface.
Check only the evidence needed to distinguish the next move. Prefer, in order: current terminal/repo/live state, current source documents, current plans or handoffs, then older memory. Run the reads, don't assume them: git -C <target-repo> status --short --branch for dirty files and ahead/behind, git -C <target-repo> log --oneline -5 for what actually landed, a direct read of the named plan/STATE/handoff file at its exact path, and, when a live surface is in scope, a fetch of the URL itself (curl -sS -o /dev/null -w '%{http_code}' <url>) instead of trusting the last recorded deploy. Skip any read that cannot change which candidate wins.
Generate 2-4 candidate actions internally. Exclude work already verified as complete, adjacent cleanup, and actions outside the user's authorized scope.
Score each candidate from 0-2 on every criterion below. Recommend the highest total.

Criterion	2 points	1 point	0 points
Goal alignment	Directly produces the user's done signal	Required prerequisite	Merely adjacent
Unblocking	Unlocks a core path or at least two downstream steps	Unlocks one step	Unlocks nothing known
Evidence	Confirmed by current source	Confirmable with one read-only check	Depends on an assumption
Urgency	Active failure, deadline, security risk, or release gate	Needed for the active milestone	No current pressure
Leverage	Fits one focused session and prevents rework or creates a reusable result	Bounded work with moderate payoff	Unscoped, multi-day, or low-payoff work

Break ties by preferring a required prerequisite, then current-evidence verification, then the more reversible action. If the top two remain within one point and target ambiguity would change the answer, run at most three additional read-only checks. If still tied, show both choices and state the single fact that decides between them.
Turn the recommendation into a 2-4 sentence quick prompt. Keep the scoring and full operator contract internal unless the user asks to compare choices, expand prompt, or make it granular.

Routing Rules

If a repo or task already has its own plan, progress doc, issue tracker, or project board, do not create a second one. Treat its recorded next step as one candidate, verify it against current source, and recommend the winner: don't replace the existing tracker.
If the user needs options explored before a commitment can be made, say so and offer to brainstorm instead of forcing a single recommendation.
If missing evidence is the real blocker, make the smallest read-only check the recommended action and generate a prompt for that check.

Prompt Levels

The three prompt depths, short copy/paste, full operator prompt, granular steps, are in references/prompt-levels.md. The default is the short prompt; read this only when the user asks to expand or make it granular.

Output Format

Recommended action: <one sentence>
Why now: <one evidence-backed sentence>

Quick prompt: <2-4 runnable sentences>

Say "expand prompt" for the full operator version or "make it granular" for exact steps and commands.

Show the route, score, evidence list, confidence, or alternatives only when the user asks for rationale or when the unresolved tie rule requires them. When the recommendation is an evidence-gathering step, state that in Why now without loading the expanded prompt.

Boundaries

Do not mutate files, repos, deployments, accounts, messages, or live systems while recommending.
Do not load the expanded or granular prompt by default.
Do not repeat a broad audit when one current execution lane can be selected.
Do not invent paths, URLs, skill availability, status, metrics, owners, or completion evidence.
Do not recommend vague actions such as "keep working", "improve the app", or "do more research". Name a command, artifact, decision, edit, or verification result.
Do not hide a blocker. If authority or a decisive fact is missing, make its resolution the next action.

Routing

Need multi-lane coordination across specialists -> use suede-agent-teams.
Need help picking which single skill fits a request -> read this pack's router (suede-workflow-skills) or ask directly.
Need idea exploration before selecting a move -> brainstorm directly with the user instead of forcing a single recommendation.
Need execution -> use the specialist named in the generated prompt.

suede-recommend-next-action

Suede Recommend Next Action

Recommendation Workflow