Conciseness

The body is operational throughout — scoring tables, matching rules, executable bash — with only minor trims available (the NFKD parenthetical "decompose accented characters to base + combining marks, strip combining marks" and the "this is your 'vocabulary'" metaphor explain things Claude already knows). Not a 5 because a few sentences restate why a rule exists rather than just giving the rule; not a 3 because there is no padded section or conceptual tutorial.

Actionability

Fully executable guidance: a copy-paste-ready git snapshot script with failure handling, concrete scoring tables ("Exact name match in text | +4"), confidence-threshold actions ("≥ 6 EXTRACTED — Apply inline"), before/after markdown examples, exact YAML blocks for relationships/affinity, and a locked `obsidian-wiki memory sync` command with enumerated fields. Specific examples cover the common cases.

Workflow Clarity

Seven clearly sequenced steps with explicit validation checkpoints and error-recovery loops for a write-heavy batch operation: a pre-write git snapshot that aborts the skill on failure ("stop before editing the vault; never continue without the promised snapshot"), confidence labels that gate which candidates are applied, rollback instructions, and QMD failure handling ("do not roll back the vault changes; report the QMD status separately"). This satisfies the destructive/batch-operation feedback-loop requirement that would otherwise cap the score at 3.

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist (references/, scripts/, assets/ are absent), so this is a single-file skill; it is well-organized with clear step headers and its external pointers (llm-wiki/SKILL.md sections, `.skills/llm-wiki/references/MEMORY.md`, WRITING.md) are explicitly named and one level deep. Not a 5 because the self-contained ~300-line body inlines material (the scoring rubric table, matching rules, QMD refresh procedure) that a bundle could have split out, keeping the top-level file longer than an overview needs to be; not a 3 because nothing is buried or nested and the inline placement is defensible for a procedural workflow.

Specificity

Names the domain ("Scan the Obsidian wiki") and several concrete actions — discover missing cross-references, weave pages into the knowledge graph, and "actually modifies pages to add links". Falls just short of the anchor-5 comprehensiveness exemplar (which lists four-plus fully enumerated operations) because the discovery/insertion actions are stated at a slightly coarser grain.

Completeness

Explicitly answers both questions: the "what" ("Scan the Obsidian wiki and automatically discover missing cross-references between pages... it actually modifies pages to add links") and an explicit "Use this skill when the user says..." clause with concrete trigger phrases. This mirrors the anchor-5 exemplar structure directly; not a 4 because the 'when' guidance is fully explicit rather than improvable.

Trigger Term Quality

Comprehensive natural-language coverage: "link my pages", "find missing links", "cross-reference", "connect my wiki", "add wikilinks", "what pages should be linked", "orphan pages", "my wiki feels disconnected", "pages aren't linked well", plus a situational trigger ("after any large ingestion"). These are phrases a user would naturally say, matching the anchor-5 example's synonym-and-variation breadth.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (Obsidian wiki cross-linking) with distinct triggers, and it explicitly disambiguates from the nearest competing skill: "unlike wiki-lint which just reports issues". Triggers like "add wikilinks" and "my wiki feels disconnected" are unlikely to fire for another skill; minimal conflict risk.