| name | ad-next |
| description | Survey the project's state across the six-layer artifact stack and recommend prioritized next actions, modeled on `flutter doctor`. Use when the user asks "what's next", "next step", "where am I", "project status", "doctor", "what should I do", "audit my workflow". Read-only; complements `ad-audit` (drift detection, a different question). Profile-aware โ `poc` suppresses Layer 3/4/5 noise, `team`/`mature` run the full survey. |
| summary | State survey + prioritized next-action recommendations across the six-layer artifact stack. Read-only navigation aid (`flutter doctor` pattern). |
<background_information>
Read-only state survey + prioritized next-action recommendations. Mirrors flutter doctor shape: layer-by-layer status + concrete fix per finding. Complements ad-audit โ audit answers "is anything wrong?", next answers "what should I do?".
The skill writes nothing. Output is recommendations the user copies into the next conversation turn or the next CLI invocation.
Codex auto-trigger on description keywords is less mature than Claude Code's. If auto-invocation does not fire when the user asks about workflow status, invoke this skill manually.
</background_information>
Step 0 โ read state. Detect baseline:
- Profile + kit version: read `.claude/agentic-state.json` and `.agents/agentic-state.json` if present. Profile defaults to `team` per ADR-0013 when state file missing or no profile field.
- Filesystem signals: `AGENTS.md` / `CLAUDE.md`, `GUIDELINES.md`, `ARCHITECTURE.md`, `DESIGN.md`, `WORKFLOW.md`, `README.md`, `package.json` / `pyproject.toml` / `Cargo.toml` / `go.mod`, `.husky/` / `lefthook.yml` / `.pre-commit-config.yaml`, `.github/workflows/`, current git branch.
- Meaningful-code signals: non-trivial files under `src/`, `app/`, `lib/`, `test/`, `tests/`, `packages/`, framework entrypoints, or manifests with real scripts/dependencies. Treat only README/LICENSE/gitignore files, agentic state, empty artifact directories, and empty manifests as trivial.
- Durable product-framing signals: PRD, specs, tasks, or README/docs/code that let you summarize the target user, problem, and current product behavior. Framework scaffolds or a few early files without that framing still count as unframed greenfield.
- Per-artifact directories: list `doc/product/`, `doc/specs/`, `doc/adr/`, `doc/tasks/`. Read each file's frontmatter (`Status:`, `Created:`, `Spec ref:` for tasks) but NOT the full body.
- Git state: current branch, commits ahead of `main` (`git rev-list --count main..HEAD`), unpushed commits, working-tree dirtiness.
- Root-doc freshness: inspect headings and references only. If a PRD exists but `AGENTS.md` / `CLAUDE.md` does not reference `doc/product/` / `PRD`, mark the operational guide as possibly stale and recommend refreshing via `/ad-bootstrap` after the product contract.
Do not parse skill bodies. Do not run tests. Do not invoke other skills.
Step 1 โ classify scenario before ranking. Layer status is evidence; scenario determines the right next step.
- Fresh / unframed greenfield: no durable product framing, even if a framework scaffold or a few early files already exist. This is a product-framing problem, not an
AGENTS.md problem.
- Product-framed greenfield: PRD exists, but no meaningful code yet. This is where
/ad-bootstrap, /ad-guidelines, optional /ad-design, then /ad-spec become the normal sequence.
- Brownfield: meaningful code exists and the scan can summarize the current product behavior. Existing code can supply product and architecture evidence;
/ad-bootstrap is scan-first here and may precede PRD backfill.
- Feature planning: PRD/spec artifacts exist and have downstream gaps (accepted PRD with no specs, accepted spec with no tasks).
- Implementation in progress: dirty tree, branch ahead of
main, in-progress tasks, blocked tasks, or proposed ADRs.
- Maintenance / install hygiene: stale kit state, profile/install mismatch, missing expected conditional skills.
If scenarios overlap, report the strongest active scenario in this order: implementation in progress, maintenance/install hygiene, feature planning, product-framed greenfield, brownfield, fresh/unframed greenfield. If code exists but product behavior cannot be summarized, choose fresh/unframed greenfield rather than brownfield.
Step 2 โ layer-by-layer status. Render six sections in this exact order. Use words for status (present, in flight, missing, stale) โ no emoji.
Layer 1 โ Constitution: WORKFLOW.md (kit-shipped), AGENTS.md / CLAUDE.md (operational guide), GUIDELINES.md (full engineering reference). AGENTS.md missing is not the first greenfield finding when product framing is missing; recommend product discovery / PRD first, then /ad-bootstrap.
Layer 2 โ Domain (CONTEXT.md): present at repo root, or CONTEXT-MAP.md plus per-context CONTEXT.md files? Lazy-created per ADR-0019 โ missing is valid for projects whose first domain term has not been resolved yet, not a finding to flag in poc / solo. For each present file, flag empty-glossary (Language section with zero terms).
Layer 3 โ Product (doc/product/): doc/product/PRD.md (single-product) or PRODUCT-MAP.md plus per-product slug files (multi-product)? Lazy-created per ADR-0027 โ missing is valid at poc (PRD profile-excluded). In fresh/unframed greenfield at solo/team/mature, missing PRD is the primary navigation finding. For each present PRD, report Status + count of feature specs whose Related โ PRD field points at it. Flag accepted PRDs with zero implementing specs.
Layer 4 โ Specs (doc/specs/): for each file, report Status + count of tasks whose Spec ref points at it. Flag specs with Status: accepted and zero implementing tasks. If frontend signals exist, also report DESIGN.md as the visual contract; missing DESIGN.md is a recommendation before /ad-spec only when frontend tokens/styles exist or the next feature touches UI.
Layer 5 โ Plans / Decisions: ARCHITECTURE.md, doc/adr/ counts by status, doc/tasks/ counts by status. Flag proposed ADRs with their slug. List in-progress + blocked tasks with slug and Spec ref. Flag tasks with no Spec ref and no Board ref as orphans. ARCHITECTURE.md missing is a finding for team/mature brownfield or when a spec creates load-bearing system patterns; it is not the first step in fresh greenfield.
Layer 6 โ Code: branch + ahead count, tests wired? (npm test / pytest / cargo test / go test), hooks wired? (.husky / lefthook.yml / .pre-commit-config.yaml / .git/hooks/), CI wired? (.github/workflows / .gitlab-ci.yml / .circleci/).
Step 3 โ cross-cut signals:
- Pending fresh-context review: branch โฅ1 commits ahead of main with no .agentic/reviews/-*.md for the current range โ recommend ad-review.
- Spec โ task reciprocity: tasks with non-empty Spec ref whose target spec is missing โ orphan; accepted/shipped specs with zero Related โ Tasks โ spec without implementing tasks.
- Profile vs install state: profile-declared skill set โ on-disk skill set โ recommend
agentic update or agentic profile set <name>.
- Stale state file: kitVersion in state file โ currently-running kit โ recommend
agentic update.
Step 4 โ prioritize next actions. Rank by workflow leverage, not by document layer number. Return 3โ5 concrete invocations, each as one-line "do X next" with slug / path.
Priority heuristic:
- Protect active work: blocked tasks, proposed ADRs blocking implementation, dirty/ahead branch needing
/ad-review, stale state that makes installed skills unreliable.
- Fresh / unframed greenfield: for solo/team/mature, recommend
/ad-grill when the product ask is fuzzy or /ad-prd when it is clear; then /ad-bootstrap. Do not recommend /ad-bootstrap first, even when a framework scaffold already exists.
- Product-framed greenfield: if PRD exists, recommend
/ad-bootstrap when AGENTS.md / CLAUDE.md is missing or stale, then /ad-guidelines, optional /ad-design, then /ad-spec.
- Brownfield: if meaningful code exists and
AGENTS.md / CLAUDE.md is missing, recommend /ad-bootstrap scan-first. Then recommend /ad-guidelines for standards, /ad-architecture for team/mature system patterns, or /ad-prd only when product scope is being backfilled or changed.
- Feature pipeline gaps: accepted PRD without specs โ
/ad-spec; accepted spec without tasks โ /ad-task; missing research before implementation โ /ad-ground.
- Quality gates and drift: mature hooks missing โ
/ad-hooks; orphan tasks/spec mismatches โ /ad-audit; kit/profile drift โ agentic update or agentic profile set <name>.
If nothing actionable surfaces, say so: "No urgent next action. Continue current work or invoke /ad-audit for a full drift check."
Step 5 โ profile-aware filtering. Apply at the end:
- poc: suppress Layer 3 (Product), Layer 4 (Specs), Layer 5 (Plans/Decisions) sections if those directories do not exist. Show Layer 1 + Layer 2 + Layer 6 only. Layer 2 (Domain) and Layer 3 (Product) render informationally โ CONTEXT.md and PRD.md missing are not findings (lazy-created; PRD also profile-excluded). Recommendation set:
/ad-grill for fuzzy exploration, /ad-ground for research-ready questions, /ad-spike when the technique is uncertain, /ad-audit for drift, agentic update for staleness. Do not recommend /ad-prd, /ad-spec, /ad-task, /ad-bootstrap, /ad-guidelines, /ad-architecture, /ad-adr, or /ad-hooks unless the user is graduating the project out of poc.
- solo: Layer 3/4/5 render; ADR / ARCHITECTURE.md absence is informational, not a flag. PRD is universal for real products, but fresh greenfield still starts with product framing before
/ad-bootstrap; brownfield quick fixes do not need PRD backfill before the fix. Specs are universal; spec-without-tasks remains a real finding. Layer 2 โ same lazy-creation rule as poc.
- team: full survey (default). Fresh greenfield still routes through product discovery / PRD before
/ad-bootstrap; brownfield may bootstrap scan-first from existing code.
- mature: additionally flag hooks-not-wired louder (WORKFLOW ยง11 binding for mature profile). Keep
/ad-hooks after product/operational context unless the only finding is missing gates.
<output_contract>
A single Markdown message structured as:
## ad-next
**Profile:** <name> (kit v<X.Y.Z>)
**Branch:** <name> (<n> commits ahead of main)
**Scenario:** <detected scenario>
### Layer 1 โ Constitution
<one-line status per artifact>
### Layer 2 โ Domain (CONTEXT.md)
<present / lazy-missing; glossary-empty flag if file exists but has no terms>
### Layer 3 โ Product (doc/product/)
<present / lazy-missing; PRD status + implementing-spec count if file exists>
### Layer 4 โ Specs (doc/specs/)
<spec list with status + task count, or "no specs"; DESIGN.md status when frontend signals exist>
### Layer 5 โ Plans / Decisions
<ADR + task summaries with explicit flags>
### Layer 6 โ Code
<branch / tests / hooks / CI status>
### Recommended next (priority)
1. <action> โ <one-line reason>
2. <action> โ <one-line reason>
No file written. No state mutation. Recommendations are advisory; the user decides whether to invoke. Cross-references ad-audit (drift detection), agentic update (kit drift โ CLI subcommand, not a skill), agentic profile (profile changes โ CLI subcommand, not a skill) where they apply.
</output_contract>
