Conciseness

There is no padding that explains concepts Claude already knows — nearly every sentence carries a non-obvious domain rule, so it sits above the level-3 'could be tightened' anchor. However, sections like decision rule 6 (postdoc handling) and rule 9 (employment-type labels) are long nested run-ons whose detail could be trimmed or pushed to a reference, matching level 4's 'minor instances that could be trimmed' rather than level 5's 'every token earns its place'.

Actionability

Fully executable guidance: concrete commands for every step ("$P preflight --mode <mode> --host <codex|opencode|claude-code|deepseek|other>", "$P snapshot --label start", "$P apply --delta delta.json", "$P closeout"), a copy-paste delta JSON example covering update/create/views/move, a mode table with explicit Allowed/Never columns, and exact field names (核查缺口, 限额处理, application_tracking, system/state/watchlist.json). This matches the level-5 anchor; the elided {…} field payloads are templates for dynamic data, not pseudocode, so it does not fall to level 4.

Workflow Clarity

The procedure is a numbered 1–5 sequence with explicit validation checkpoints at every stage: snapshot after every preflight, "Then $P validate --snapshot <path>", apply that 'simulates it (refusing new validation errors)', and closeout whose receipt must be quoted with failures reported as "not complete". Feedback loops are explicit ("If it refuses, change the delta or ask the user; never bypass it"), and the report template acts as a closing checklist — matching the level-5 anchor exactly.

Progressive Disclosure

Good structure: the three local references (quota.md, network.md, delivery.md) all exist, are one level deep, and are clearly signaled with markdown links at the point of need, and the scripts directory is referenced appropriately. It falls short of level 5 because the main file is a 194-line operating manual rather than an overview — decision rules 6 and 9 in particular carry reference-level detail inline — and several links point outside the bundle to the sibling skill ("../jobradar/references/hosts.md", jobradar "record-schema.md"), which do not resolve within this skill's directory.

Specificity

The description lists multiple concrete actions covering every mode of the skill: "复核已有候选，保留可能申请的对象并评级", "核实岗位直达入口、截止日期与名额限制", "维护或交付飞书求职工作台", "记录本人报告的投递状态" — comprehensive coverage of the skill's capabilities, matching the level-5 anchor rather than the level-4 anchor (which implies minor gaps in coverage).

Completeness

Both halves are explicit: the 'what' is the full action list, and the 'when' is the concrete trigger clause "用于第二轮精筛、评级、表格维护与交付", reinforced by negative boundaries "不做海量搜索（交给 jobradar），不执行投递". This matches the level-5 anchor (clear what AND when with concrete trigger phrases), not level 4 where the 'when' is only implicit or less specific.

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural-term coverage with synonyms: "第二轮精筛", "评级", "表格维护与交付", "投递状态", "截止日期", "名额", plus the parenthetical "(stage-2 shortlist)" and "第二阶段" as variants. It falls short of the level-5 'comprehensive including synonyms and file extensions' anchor because a few natural user phrasings (e.g. 岗位复查/核对, 面试进展, 候选人筛选) are not covered; it is clearly above level 3, which expects missing common variations.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

It carves out a clear niche — second-round re-screening of existing candidates — and explicitly delegates conflicting work: "不做海量搜索（交给 jobradar），不执行投递", minimizing the risk of triggering for the sibling stage-1 skill or an application-submission request. Voice is third person throughout, so no specificity penalty applies.