nudge2.0 - AI schedules your whole week to take action
by•
Don't manage. Just do.
nudge plans your week so you don't have to
- Don't create. Type plain text — AI turns it into real tasks with deadlines.
- Don't plan your day. One click, AI schedules around sleep, meals, and fixed events.
- Don't let yourself off. Lock $5 on a deadline. Finish and prove it — you pay nothing.
- Don't switch apps. Capture and reschedule from Slack & Discord.
- Don't get lost. One workspace.
$5 first month, then $20/mo.
Solo-built by a 20yo engineering student in Tokyo.
Replies
dropped a few tasks and the AI slotted them around my sleep and lunch blocks without me lifting a finger, which actually saved me the usual sunday night planning headache.
@shun_build the dawn sweep detail answers what I was going to ask about missed days. curious how it decides priority when several tasks get pushed at once. Is it weighted by original deadline, by the $ locked on each, or something else?
@clement_avq hank you so much for this question — you went exactly where I hoped someone would. 🙏
Short honest answer: neither deadline nor $. It's oldest slip first:
• Tasks are ordered by their original date — the one that's been pushed the longest gets today's first free slot.
• Slots are your real availability: working hours minus calendar events and lunch, on a 15-min grid.
• The $ locked never buys priority — the lock is a commitment device, not a bid. And if something doesn't fit today, it isn't squeezed or hidden: it stays overdue, appears in your morning digest, and retries tomorrow.
Deadline weighting is a fair idea and honestly isn't in there yet — the current bet is that the longest-avoided task is the one that needs daylight first. Thanks again for asking the sharp version of this. 🌅
@shun_build that makes sense! fairness over urgency. But what if something I add today is genuinely more time sensitive than a task that's been slipping for a week? does a same day urgent add ever jump the queue, or does oldest slip first always win regardless of how pressing the new one is?
@clement_avq Ahh this is such a sharp one — you caught the exact edge case I'm still wrestling with 😅🙏
Honest answer: it's not strictly oldest-first anymore — deadlines do factor in. A same-day urgent add (something actually due today) will jump ahead of tasks that aren't truly due yet, even if those have been slipping longer. Pure "oldest slip first" only decides ties between things that are equally not-yet-pressing.
And the part I lean on most: you always get the final say. At-risk tasks get flagged right in the UI, so you can just drag the urgent one into place — or honestly the easiest route, tell the in-app AI chat "do this one first today" and it re-slots everything around it 🌅
I'll be the first to admit the deadline weighting is still a bit rough around the edges — but questions like yours are exactly what's sharpening it release by release. Genuinely thank you for pushing on this 🙌
@shun_build Thanks for your swift feedback !
good to know I'm not stuck if it gets the order wrong. Going to bother you once more with a quick follow up: how far ahead does the at risk flag show up? Night before, first thing that morning, or does it depend on how packed the day already is?
the scheduling logic thread here is already really thorough. the part I'm curious about is the other side of the $5 stake, the "finish and submit proof" step. who's actually checking that proof, is it a photo/screenshot a human reviews, or something automated? and what stops someone from submitting something low effort just to get the lock back, a blurry photo of a "done" task that wasn't really done. seems like the honesty of the whole stake mechanic depends on that verification step being harder to game than the task itself
@galdayan Thank you so much for sharing this 😁🙏
Right now: proof is a photo/screenshot judged by AI, no human in the loop, and the bar is deliberately loose. This is beta, so I'd rather err toward false-accepts than take $5 off someone because the model didn't like a badly lit photo. A wrongly-kept stake is annoying; a wrongly-taken one is a refund and a churned user.
So yes — a blurry "done" photo passes today. I'm treating that as acceptable beta debt, not a solved problem.
Where it goes: a stricter review process with real teeth — clearer proof specs per task type, human escalation on low-confidence cases, and ideally verification that doesn't rely on the user producing evidence at all (looking at screenpipe for this — if the task was "write the draft," the machine already knows).
The Slack and Discord integration is a nice touch, but I'd love to see a simple way to share specific tasks or deadlines with a teammate without giving them access to my whole week. Like a public link or one-off invite just for that task.
@zlem82302231267 Wow, thank you — I really appreciate you taking the time to share this! 🙏
A scoped share link for a single task (without opening up your whole week) is a great idea, and honestly it fits perfectly with nudge's "never open the app" philosophy. I'll definitely look into including this in the next update.
Feedback like this means a lot to a solo builder. Thank you!😄
the "schedules your whole week to take action" part is the interesting bit vs just another calendar overlay. my actual pain isn't seeing a schedule, it's that priorities shift mid-week and I never go back and re-slot everything. does nudge actually re-plan the rest of the week automatically when something gets pushed, or do I still have to manually tell it what moved?
@omri_ben_shoham1 Thanks so much for writing this 🙏
Honest answer: not yet. nudge doesn't automatically re-plan the rest of the week when something slips — it won't reshuffle priorities on its own.
What it does today is closer to conversational: when something gets pushed, you tell nudge in Slack and it slots the task back in around what's already there. So it's not "silently rebuilt your week," but it's also not you dragging blocks around a calendar — you say "this moved," it handles the re-slotting. That's honestly the ceiling of what the tool does right now.
But this is a great point and it's the version I want to build. The trigger shouldn't have to be you remembering to say something — a task going untouched past its slot is already a signal, and nudge should be the one starting that conversation, not waiting for you. Adding this to the roadmap.
Update from launch day: WE HAVE OUR FIRST PAYING CUSTOMER!! 🎉😭
i've never met this person and i love them.🎉🎉🎉
The honesty in this really stood out to me. “I plan a perfect week in Notion on Sunday and abandon it by Tuesday” is such a painfully relatable experience 😅
Love that you’re not building another tool that asks people to become perfectly disciplined, you’re building around how people actually work. Excited to see where nudge goes.
I actually put together a quick one-page voice guide inspired by the tone of nudge. If you’d ever like to take a look, I’d be happy to share… no pressure at all. I just enjoyed the honesty behind the product enough that it made me want to play around with the story a little.
@tabitha_robyn Thank you so much🙏😄 — that's exactly the pain I built nudge around, so it means a lot that it landed.
And yes, I'd love to see the voice guide. Send it over whenever.😄
@shun_build Awesome, glad it landed!😊 Where’s easiest for you, email or on Twitter? I’ll send it right over.
@shun_build Just upvoted. Scheduling AI is a crowded space, so the first email someone gets from you matters more than most, curious about your approach.
@shunsukenakagawa appreciate the honest answer, a lot of teams would've just said "yes it does that" and let me find out the hard way. the conversational re-slotting in Slack actually sounds like the right ceiling for now, fully automatic replanning without me saying anything sounds like it could go wrong in ways that are hard to trust. good luck shipping the untouched-task trigger, that's the harder problem