Recommendation Brief

Recommendation Brief — The Closer

Action skill: the output contract of the consumer-research suite. Commercial AI shopping tools have a documented explainability void — users can't see why X beat Y. The EMPTOR BRIEF is the inverse: every claim cited, every confidence tagged with a because-clause, every weight visible, and the brief declares its own expiry.

Description

Consumes the evaluation matrix (produced by agentic-researcher — verbatim, no re-scoring), verification and forensics results, and the requirements spec; renders the graded brief; runs the pre-flight audit; emits the CRS-YYYYMMDD-<slug> brief ID that /calibrate, /purchase-log, and /purchase-review key on. Confidence tags follow skills/research/spelunker/references/confidence-framework.md.

Input

Process

1. Generate the brief ID: CRS-YYYYMMDD-<6-char-slug>.
2. Set TOP PICK CONFIDENCE from the weakest load-bearing link: evidence quality of the winning finalist, sensitivity stability, and verification status. Ceiling rules — sensitivity-unstable → at most Likely (and present co-leads); any must-have unverifiable on the winner → at most Speculative; Tier 1 disagreement on a deciding criterion → Contested, present both.
3. Render sections in contract order (below). RUNNERS-UP each get a "choose this instead if…" condition. SATISFICING NOTE appears whenever ≥2 finalists clear every must-have and survive sensitivity — mandatory phrasing for maximizer-leaning buyers.
4. Stamp freshness: every price/availability fact carries its check date; GAPS & FRESHNESS states the date the brief should be considered stale (earliest decaying source per atlas rules).
5. Run the pre-flight audit. Reject and regenerate once on any failure; second failure → fix in place before delivery. Checks:
   • TOP PICK CONFIDENCE on line 2; Brief ID on line 3.
   • Every empirical claim has [N] or [no source]; every tag has a because-clause.
   • Every finalist has an availability verdict; every WHERE TO BUY merchant has a trust verdict.
   • SOURCES numbered with Tier and Used-for; no orphan/unused citation numbers.
   • GAPS & FRESHNESS non-empty; footer verbatim.
6. Deliver, then hand to decision-journal for persistence.

Output

RECOMMENDATION BRIEF
TOP PICK CONFIDENCE: <Confirmed|Likely|Speculative|Contested>
Brief ID: CRS-YYYYMMDD-<slug>
<One-paragraph verdict with [N] citations.>

REQUIREMENTS SNAPSHOT      — job, must-haves, weights, budget (locked before price exposure: yes/no)
TOP PICK                   — product (exact SKU), price @ date, why; Confidence: [Tag] because …
RUNNERS-UP                 — each: "choose this instead if …"
TRADE-OFF MAP              — per finalist: best at X, sacrifices Y
EVALUATION MATRIX          — weighted scores, weights shown (verbatim from evaluation)
SENSITIVITY                — stable/unstable; which weight shift flips the pick
VERIFICATION & AUTHENTICITY — availability per finalist (dated), recalls, forensics verdicts
WHERE TO BUY               — merchant + trust verdict + price + return policy, all dated
GAPS & FRESHNESS           — unverified claims, missing data; "stale after: <date>"
SOURCES                    — numbered; Tier N; date; Used for: …
SATISFICING NOTE           — when applicable
NEXT STEPS                 — what to verify in person / before checkout

─────────────────────────────────────
Was this brief useful? Reply `/feedback emptor <1-5> [optional notes]` to log.
Brief ID: CRS-... · Bought something? `/purchase-log CRS-... <product> [price] [merchant]` · 30 days later: `/purchase-review CRS-... <1-5>`

Error Handling

Scope Boundaries

Handles: rendering, auditing, and grading the final brief. Does not: score candidates, verify facts, or persist anything (that's decision-journal).

Related Skills

• Consumes agentic-researcher output verbatim; cites the spelunker confidence framework; hands off to decision-journal.

Learn Block

Next, learn decision-journal — where the brief, the decision, and the 30-day verdict live on.