Conciseness

The body is dense and purposeful — exact grep patterns, impact percentages (domain data Claude cannot reliably recall), and verification instructions with little conceptual padding. However, the "Scope" section restates the frontmatter description, "Invocation Examples" duplicates trigger guidance, and the "Tool Use Is Mandatory" lecture pads the opening, placing it at anchor 4 (efficient, some trimmable content) rather than anchor 5 (every token earns its place).

Actionability

Highly concrete: copy-paste-ready grep strings per pattern, an exact xcsym command, per-pattern verify/issue/impact/fix structure, and a full output template. Minor gaps keep it below anchor 5: the "Fix:" lines are terse directives with no code snippets (despite the output format demanding "Code example showing the fix"), and Step 3's "Read 2-3 key files" does not specify which files to choose.

Workflow Clarity

Phases 1-5 are clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints: "use Read to verify the surrounding context before reporting", "Present this map in the output before proceeding", and "Require evidence from the Phase 1 map — don't speculate". A false-positive checklist and verification counts round out error prevention, matching anchor 5 (clear sequence with explicit validation and checklists); no destructive/batch cap applies since this is a read-only audit.

Progressive Disclosure

No reference files exist in the bundle — all detail (eight pattern definitions, the pattern_tag correlation table, output template) is inlined in a single 285-line file with only a Related section pointing to sibling skills. Headers make it navigable, but content that could live in one-level-deep reference files is inline, matching anchor 3 rather than anchor 4's 'appropriately placed content with clear file references'.

Specificity

The description lists several concrete detection targets — "timer abuse, polling patterns, continuous location, animation leaks, and background mode misuse" — but never states the action it performs (audit/detect/report), and omits three of the eight patterns the body covers (network, GPU, disk I/O). This fits anchor 4 (several specific items, minor coverage gaps) rather than 5 (comprehensive action coverage) and is well above anchor 3 (only 1-2 concrete actions).

Completeness

The "when" is explicit and well-phrased ("Use when the user mentions battery drain...") while the "what" is only implied through the pattern list and the phrase "power consumption audit" — no explicit action statement like "Audits code for...". Both are present but the what could be more explicit, matching anchor 4; it exceeds anchor 3 (what clear, when missing) and falls short of anchor 5 (both explicit with concrete trigger phrases).

Trigger Term Quality

Natural phrases users would actually say are present: "battery drain", "energy optimization", "power consumption audit", "pre-release energy check". Common synonyms like "battery life", "power usage", or "check my app for battery drain" are missing, which matches anchor 4 (good coverage, a few natural terms missing) rather than 5 (comprehensive synonyms/extensions).

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The triggers are unambiguously energy-specific (battery drain, power consumption audit, energy check), forming a clear niche with minimal conflict risk against general code-review or performance skills. This matches anchor 5; the only mild overlap candidate, "energy optimization", still points squarely at this skill's domain, so anchor 4's 'minor overlap risk' is a weaker fit.