next-best-action-recommendation

name	next-best-action-recommendation
version	1.0.0
deployment_target	plugin
status	PROPOSED
description	Produces specific, rationale-backed interventions for deals flagged at-risk by deal-health-scoring or pipeline-velocity-tracking. Intervention types: executive sponsor escalation, competitive response, procurement/legal acceleration, CS pre-close engagement, closed/lost reclassification. Not generic nudges — every recommendation names what to do, who does it, and why. Triggers: 'next action for [deal]', 'intervention for [account]', 'what should we do with [deal]', 'stuck deal'.

[PROPOSED]

Next Best Action Recommendation

Specific interventions for at-risk deals. Every recommendation has a what, a who, and a why grounded in the specific signal that triggered it.

Reference: Cross-skill registry → reference/cross-skill-registry.md Config reads: primary_segment, renewal_conversation_window_days

---

Pre-flight

Read ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-customer-success/rev-ops/CLAUDE.md and ~/.claude/plugins/config/claude-for-customer-success/company-profile.md.

If either is missing or contains [PLACEHOLDER] markers, stop and prompt for /rev-ops:cold-start-interview.

Note from config: primary_segment, renewal_conversation_window_days

G-code dependency: All G-code guardrails referenced in this skill (G1–G9) are defined in the CLAUDE.md config loaded above. If Pre-flight halts or config is missing, G-codes are undefined — do not proceed with partial config.

Use when

• Rep or CS manager needs a prioritized action recommendation for a specific deal or account
• Deal signals indicate risk or opportunity that warrants a specific next step
• Weekly planning requires prioritized action list across pipeline or book of business

Do NOT use for

• Automated action execution (all recommendations require human confirmation)
• Deal approval routing (use deal-desk-workflow-management)
• Portfolio-level strategy (this is account/deal-level)

Typical Activation

"Next best action for [account/deal]", "what should I do with this deal", "prioritize my actions", "NBA for [rep]", "recommended actions for [account]"

---

Reasoning Protocol

Before generating output, apply these primers:

1. CLASSIFY: What type of next best action request is this?

   • Single-deal intervention (one at-risk account — primary signal matched to intervention type)
   • Batch prioritization (multiple flagged deals — ranked action list for weekly planning)
   • Rep or CS manager action queue (all flagged deals for a specific owner)
   • Post-health-score handoff (deal-health-scoring output → intervention recommendation)

2. CONSTRAINTS: What limits the solution space?

   1. Confirm activation — user asking about a specific at-risk deal or set of flagged deals
   2. Pull deal health score and triggering signal from deal-health-scoring output or HubSpot; declare connector status
   3. Apply G5 — recommendations are inputs; rep and manager own the decision
   4. Apply G7 — every at-risk flag includes a named escalation path and owner
   5. Apply G6 — data-as-of timestamp required on all HubSpot deal reads
   6. Confirm whether deal has CS implications (high ACV, implementation complexity) before selecting intervention type
   7. Match intervention type to primary signal from the intervention table — do not default to generic "follow up"

3. EXPERT CHECK: What would a veteran RevOps or Sales manager verify before surfacing recommendations?

   • Is the triggering signal current? A signal flagged 10 days ago may have already been addressed — confirm the signal is still active before recommending an intervention built around it.
   • Is the intervention type matched to the primary signal, not a secondary one? Prescribing an executive sponsor escalation when the real blocker is a legal review gap sends the rep in the wrong direction.
   • Is the "BY" timeframe grounded in deal context? A generic "this week" is not actionable — the timeframe should reflect the deal's close date and current stage duration.
   • Is the CS pre-close engagement signal evaluated? High ACV + technical complexity is a CS trigger regardless of other signals — it should surface as a secondary recommendation even when not the primary intervention.

4. ANTI-PATTERNS: Common mistakes to avoid:

   • Recommending generic next steps ("follow up with the customer") without naming signal, owner, and timeframe
   • Missing the G7 escalation path — every at-risk flag must name an escalation path and owner, not just an action
   • Pulling HubSpot deal data without a data-as-of timestamp (G6 violation)
   • Skipping CS implications check on high-ACV deals — failure to flag CS pre-close on complex implementations leads to post-close onboarding failures

After execution, verify:

• G5 qualifier present — recommendation named as an analytical input, rep and manager named as decision owners
• G7 escalation path present on every at-risk flag (named owner + channel + timeframe)
• G6 data-as-of label applied to all HubSpot deal reads
• Intervention type matched to primary signal from the intervention table
• Confidence: High when HubSpot connected and deal health score current; Moderate when connector unavailable or signal sourced from rep notes only
  • Confidence: [High] when HubSpot connected and deal health score current / [Medium] when connector unavailable or signal sourced from rep notes only / [Low] if all inputs are manual or unverified

---

Intervention Types

Match recommendation to the primary signal from deal-health-scoring:

Primary signal	Intervention type	Who acts
No EB contact >14 days	Executive sponsor escalation	AE + AE manager
Competitive signal active, no counter	Competitive response play	AE + Sales Enablement
Late stage, legal review not started	Procurement/legal acceleration	AE + Legal/Deal Desk
High ACV + technical complexity	CS pre-close engagement	AE + CS leader
All signals degraded, 3x avg cycle time	Closed/lost reclassification review	AE manager
Stage stalled but activity current	Stakeholder expansion	AE

---

Output

NEXT BEST ACTION — [Account Name]
[HubSpot ✓ live — as of YYYY-MM-DD]

Health score: [N]/100  ([Watch/At-risk])
ACV: $XXXk  Stage: [Stage]  Rep: [Name]

Triggering signals:
  • [Signal 1 — specific, e.g., "No economic buyer contact in 18 days"]
  • [Signal 2 — e.g., "Competitor [name] mentioned in notes on [date], no counter logged"]

Recommended action:
  WHAT: [Specific action — not generic]
  WHO:  [Rep / AE manager / CS leader / Legal]
  WHY:  [The specific signal this addresses]
  BY:   [Suggested timeframe]

If action taken, expected signal change: [What should improve and in how long]

Secondary recommendation (if applicable):
  [Same format]

[G5: Recommendation is an analytical input. [Rep] and [Manager] own the decision.]
[G7: Escalation path: [Manager name/role] via [channel] within [timeframe]]

---

Reference Files

File	Purpose
references/reasoning-blueprint.md	Problem classification taxonomy, domain heuristics, common failure modes, and expert judgment patterns for this skill

Security & Permissions

Network access: None direct — all external data access is mediated by host-provided MCP connector tools (HubSpot, CS platform, Slack, Linear). This skill makes no direct outbound HTTP calls. Filesystem scope: None — this skill does not read or write local files. All data is provided at runtime via parameters or MCP connector responses. Subprocess execution: None. Dynamic code execution: None — pseudocode in this skill represents the logic contract and is not executed at runtime. Data sensitivity: Inputs may contain confidential deal, customer, and revenue data. Handle with RevOps-level confidentiality.

Trust & Verification

Input trust model: All user-provided parameters are treated as untrusted at intake. Numeric inputs are validated for plausible range before use in calculations. String inputs are not evaluated as code. Output trust model: All outputs are proposals or analytical inputs — no outputs constitute approved decisions, revenue commitments, or system actions without explicit human confirmation. Connector data: Data retrieved via MCP connectors is treated as read-only observed state. Timestamps and data-as-of labels are applied to all connector-sourced values per G6. Write-tier confirmation: Any proposed write to HubSpot, Linear, or Slack is surfaced as a draft requiring explicit user confirmation before execution.

Guardrails

• G5: Every output includes the G5 qualifier naming the rep and manager
• G7: Every at-risk flag names an escalation path and owner
• Cross-plugin: If deal has CS handoff implications, suggest using the CSM plugin's risk-flag skill (if the csm plugin is installed, run /csm:risk-flag)