Thank you for the input! Very helpful to have fresh pairs of eyes look over these rules, definitely some things I ought to adjust/clarify.
Go Unnoticed: I'm happy with this one, because I like putting the player on the spot to make a choice even with the worst possible outcome, where they have to weigh the situation/consequences and decide for themselves whether getting what they were after is worth more than trying to mitigate the damage of been seen/identified.
Read Their Hand: Rubberduck's reordering reads much cleaner than mine, thanks! Still may fiddle with this one a bit; the intent is that you need to roll because you're putting yourself out there by engaging with the other person to the extent that you're able to pick up informantion about their goals/state of mind, which runs the risk of tipping your own hand and letting them learn more about you than you necessarily wanted to reveal.
Push/Tough It Out: Push is roughly equivalent to Act Under Fire from Apocalypse World, Tough It Out is intended to be more of a replacement for AW's roll after you've suffered harm. Or to put it another way, Push is active, Tough It Out is reactive. Push is when you're taking the initiative to attempt something risky (and, like Act Under Fire, is a catchall move for actions that don't clearly fall under another, more specific moves), Tough It Out is when somebody else is doing something to you and you're trying to endure it.
Tough It Out options: This I definitely need to modify or phrase better; the first option is intended to affect long term consequences of the beating you took, while the second option affects the immediate consequences. Taking the first and not the second still means you're effectively disabled in the current scene, and potentially out of action for hours/days depending on the nature of the injuries you've received, but you'll make a complete recovery, and faster than you would otherwise. Taking the second and not the first means you can keep going in the current scene (with a slight penalty, since being able to completely negate an injury is boring), but after the immediate situation's passed and your burst of adrenaline's spent, you'll be out of action longer, and if the way you were hurt is the sort of thing that'd potentially leave you with permanent injuries (scarring, disfigurement, etc.), it does. The two options aren't supposed to overlap, so taking both gives you both benefits: You're still active in the current scene, albeit with a penalty, and your recovery will be shorter than normal and leave no lasting effects.
(Choices between immediate danger and long term repercussions is something I hope stands out as a recurring element in these rules. Like Go Unnoticed; getting caught in the act is an immediate danger, but if you can make it out of this situation without any more slip-ups, you're in the clear. Leaving evidence that points back to you doesn't cause an immediate threat, but can be much more damaging to you as whoever you've ticked off can potentially trace exactly who you are, where you live, who your friends are, etc.)
Send a Message: Not choosing the second option means an excess of violence; perhaps there'll be bystanders caught in the crossfire, or if you rolled the move against someone you only intended to rough up and threaten, they'll end up maimed or dead. This is different from the treatment of violence/combat in action-centric RPGs or even a more narrative experience like Apocalypse World, and it'll require buy-in from the players and the MC, but I want to avoid framing violence primarily as a competition where effectiveness is tied to being able to inflict more violence (which is also the main reason there's no health bar/weapon stats). For the genre/tone I'm trying to emulate, I want violence to be more of a nuclear option: It's an incredibly effective tool, and very difficult to defend against, but carries severe repercussions that mainly serve to push you onto a downward spiral where you have fewer and fewer options for interacting with the rest of society other than more violence. Being good at violence is less about being able to cause more violence than it is about being able to control your violence enough that you can direct it efficiently and mitigate the consequences to yourself. That's why you can essentially kill anyone on a 7-9 roll, and most of the options from high rolls are tied to minimizing the repercussions.