Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence — no general concepts are explained, and every fact is internal-library-specific (routing order, capability flags, cache TTL/cap, status shapes). It falls just short of 'every token earns its place' because the dense status-enumeration and routing paragraphs are run-on prose that restates capability-verification points twice and could be tightened into the existing table format. Not 3: there is no unnecessary explanation or padding, only minor tightening opportunities.

Actionability

Provides a complete, executable TypeScript example of the core decide() call, a table specifying the three question shapes with exact fields, and concrete operational facts (cache key identity fields, 60-second TTL, 256-entry cap, distinct status outcomes). Minor gaps keep it below 5: no example of handling not_configured/failed results or calling getDecisionsStatus(), and the OpenAI fixtures are mentioned but not linked. Not 3: the guidance is real executable code and specific detail, not pseudocode.

Workflow Clarity

For this single-action skill the call is unambiguous: pass ownerEmail, input, and named questions, then handle ok / not_configured / failed as distinct outcomes with 'never turn a failure into an answer' as an explicit checkpoint. The document also spells out the fallback sequence (Jev skipped for unverified score, continue to next provider, Jev-only returns failed with unverified_capability), covering error paths rather than leaving them implicit. Not 4: no validation gap remains — every failure mode and its expected handling is stated.

Progressive Disclosure

Good structure with clear sections (Rule, How, Provider routing and caches, Related skills) and content appropriately sized for a single file with no bundle files present. Not 5: the body is ~69 lines, above the under-50-line simple-skill threshold, and the reference to 'documented fixtures' for the OpenAI request/response mapping is not a clearly signaled path, leaving a minor organization gap. Not 3: nothing that belongs in a separate file is inlined and the sections are easy to navigate.

Specificity

Names the concrete domain ('capability-aware classification and scoring' via '@agent-native/core/decisions') and several specific actions ('decision evaluation, provider ordering, per-provider thresholds, or decision-result caches'), matching the 'several specific actions; minor gaps' anchor. Not 5 because coverage is context-oriented rather than a comprehensive list of concrete operations, and not 3 because it lists four distinct concrete topics rather than just 1-2.

Completeness

Explicitly answers both parts: the 'what' ('How to use @agent-native/core/decisions for capability-aware classification and scoring') and the 'when' with a concrete 'Use when implementing or reviewing...' clause listing four trigger phrases. This matches the anchor for clearly and explicitly answering both with concrete trigger phrases; score 4 would require the 'when' to be less explicit, which it is not.

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural keyword coverage within the domain: 'classification', 'scoring', 'decision evaluation', 'provider ordering', 'per-provider thresholds', 'decision-result caches' — phrases a user of this library would plausibly say. Not 5 because a few natural synonyms and variations (e.g. 'classify inputs', 'route providers', 'question types') are missing; not 3 because coverage clearly exceeds 'some relevant keywords'.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The description is anchored to a specific package name and niche triggers (provider ordering, per-provider thresholds, decision-result caches) that no generic or neighboring skill would claim, giving a clear niche with minimal conflict risk. Score 4 would require minor overlap risk with closely related skills, but the package-scoped framing and specialized trigger terms avoid that.