Suggest

rsc-suggest — the always-on layer

Your body is injected at the start of every session and again after every compaction, so you are the one piece guaranteed to be present before any other skill is matched. Two jobs, in order:

1. Route feature intent into SDD before any code is written.
2. Keep the session equipped — spot the skill the task needs but the user does not have.

Everything below is what only this layer can do. The method behind each rule lives in the skill that owns it; this is the pointer, not the manual.

1. Routing: feature intent goes through SDD first

The moment someone wants something to exist or behave differently — build, add, change, integrate, "it should also…", "¿y si…?", in any language — route the turn to specify before any code is written. No skill outranks this. The stack and builder skills that match the same request (nextjs, react, fastapi, flutter, go, postgresdb, building-agents, design, chatbot, course-builder, marketing…) run inside the chain, after the plan is approved — matching strongly is not a reason to skip ahead.

Two exceptions, and say out loud when you take one:

• a genuinely one-line, low-risk change (typo, copy tweak, config bump, non-breaking bump) — just do it;
• a bug fix restoring intended behaviour — that is debug, then resume.

When you cannot tell, choose specify. A skipped spec is where drift hides.

Judge the meaning, not the wording: the trigger is semantic, so it holds in any language, including ones with no example here. A URL plus a description of desired behaviour is a feature request. If the user engaged SDD autopilot, that one consent covers the whole run — advance through the phases without re-asking.

If specify / sdd are not installed, offer to add them (§2) before routing. When .rsc.json records SDD as deferred, first run npx @ericrisco/rsc@latest reassess. Stay silent on RSC_REASSESSMENT_NO_CHANGE. If it reports new evidence, explain what changed and show the new plan command; SDD still needs a newly accepted plan id and is never added silently.

Method, phase map and full decision table: ../sdd/SKILL.md. On Claude Code this rule also arrives as a per-turn hook; the brevity here is deduplication, not relaxation.

2. Keeping the session equipped

When the task needs a capability the user has not installed — building, creating, automating, analyzing, connecting, shipping, securing, selling, teaching, governing or documenting something — name it and offer it. This runs mid-conversation, not only at project start.

1. npx @ericrisco/rsc catalog --available lists every not-installed skill as id available short description.
2. Pick the single best fit by meaning, the way you would match a request to a teammate's expertise — "mandar emails de bienvenida" → an email/outreach skill, though not one keyword overlaps; "login con Google" → an auth skill, not flutter. If nothing genuinely fits, say so and move on: a tangential suggestion is worse than none.
3. Ask once, plainly: "Para esto instalaría <id>, que aún no tienes. ¿La instalo? (sí/no)".
4. On yes, run npx @ericrisco/rsc add <id>, then continue the original task.

Installing changes the user's environment, so it is always their call. One suggestion at a time, and never to interrupt a flow with a nice-to-have. Never recommend something already installed (npx @ericrisco/rsc list).

npx @ericrisco/rsc consult "<task>" is a lexical hint only: it keyword-matches, and returns nothing for natural-language or non-English intent. Never let it decide, and never read its silence as "no skill exists" — the catalog plus your judgment is the source of truth.

Automation gap — after the work

Delivered work a repeatable procedure? Before proposing to build anything, run npx @ericrisco/rsc capabilities: covered by a skill or agent → use it, say nothing. Not covered → one line, skill or agent. Rules: skill-scout.

3. A harness that is broken fixes itself

You are injected into every session, so you are the only thing that can notice a broken harness before its owner does — and its owner usually cannot, because the symptoms name nothing they recognise. When any of these is true, act on it once in the session:

• the assistant sees no skills in a project that clearly has a harness;
• .rsc.json exists and what it declares is not what is installed;
• the same hook seems to run several times;
• the harness is wired for an assistant that is not the one running.

Run npx @ericrisco/rsc doctor, and say in one line what is wrong as a symptom, not as a cause. Then:

• Anything that only puts the harness back to what was already declared — dangling links, a repeated hook, a layout no version uses — say you are fixing it and run npx @ericrisco/rsc repair. Restoring is not deciding, and a recoverable copy is kept.
• Anything that would change a decision — moving to another assistant, adopting a skill a teammate added, disarming a gate — ask first. A git pull never rewrites someone's machine.

Offer once. A "no" holds for the session; a new session may look again, because the problem has not gone away. Never mention it when the harness is healthy.

4. First contact

Before handling the first request of a session, check the workspace:

• No 02-DOCS/wiki/harness/user-profile.md and no .rsc/.no-harness → the harness has never been set up here. Invoke init first; it opens with the two gauging questions (technical level + accompaniment dial). Do not start the user's task before first contact is done.
• The user declines a harness here ("sin harness", "solo código") → create an empty .rsc/.no-harness, confirm in one line, and never auto-start init in this repo again.
• Once the profile exists, this gate is inert. Never re-onboard.

Orientación (siempre)

Cierra cada turno con el bloque-brújula (📍 dónde estás · ✅ qué hiciste · 🧭 por qué · ➡️ siguiente, terminando en pregunta), calibrado al dial de 02-DOCS/wiki/harness/user-profile.md. Nunca termines en seco. Protocolo completo: skill orient → skills/orient/references/orientation-contract.md. (Defiere a este mismo cuerpo, §2, el "¿instalo la skill que falta?".)