Is it though? Russian conventional army has clearly been devastated by corruption and bad administration, as the generals and staff didn't anticipate that it would actually be used in a real all-out war. What makes you think that nuclear forces are in better shape?
There's a significant chance their nuclear weapons are in absolute shambles, but who wants to call that bluff?
Additionally, even if their nuclear forces are in shambles, it really only takes a single launch to set off nuclear war. It's not like their entire nuclear force needs to function in order for the world to see a very bad outcome.
When I say "shambles" I don't mean "0% functional, can't even launch a missile."
The system would have to be minimally functional to at least launch something. But at that point, even if the warhead is a dud or the rocket explodes immediately after launch, or goes off target, etc - the genie is well and truly out of the bottle.
Search Bulava / Topol tests 201x, RU test fires ICBMs successfully every year. Reporting of current RU incompetence doesn't suggest anything deficient with their rocketry functionality except not much missiles were used, and a few precision strikes on runways were consistently off course by several meters and missed the runway, indicating user error. Several meters doesn't matter with nukes.
Is it though? Russian conventional army has clearly been devastated by corruption and bad administration, as the generals and staff didn't anticipate that it would actually be used in a real all-out war. What makes you think that nuclear forces are in better shape?