Conciseness

The body is almost entirely project-specific policy with no generic-concept teaching, but it carries noticeable rationale padding — extended justifications ("Telling a user to confirm the passing of tests that do not exist is worse than saying nothing"), the "omitted vs forgotten" principle stated at length in multiple places, and a stray double-period typo in Phase 3. Anchor 3 ("mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened") fits: it is not anchor 2 because nothing explains concepts Claude already knows, and not anchor 4 because the rhetorical elaboration exceeds minor trimmable instances.

Actionability

Fully executable throughout: exact Grep invocations with pattern, path, output_mode and -A flags; exact per-engine verification commands (godot --headless -s parse-check, Unity -batchmode smoke, UnrealBuildTool/Build.sh per platform); verbatim AskUserQuestion prompts with enumerated options; exact file paths, exit-code semantics, and a copy-paste summary/checkpoint template. This matches anchor 5 — copy-paste-ready commands covering the common cases.

Workflow Clarity

Phases 1–7 are clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints everywhere: file-existence gates with STOP/WARN semantics per tier, ADR status and version-mismatch handling, dependency status checks, exit-code-based parse verification, run-and-observe with retained screenshots, INCOMPLETE detection for agents that stop early, and a dedicated error recovery protocol requiring partial reports. This matches anchor 5 — explicit validation steps, feedback loops, and error recovery.

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist (references/, scripts/, assets/ are all absent), so everything lives in one ~660-line SKILL.md. External references (.claude/docs/run-and-observe.md, error-recovery-protocol.md, automation-modes.md, code-root-resolution.md, test-standards.md) are one level deep and clearly signaled, but substantial material that belongs in separate files — agent routing tables, engine specialist rosters, per-platform build commands, per-engine test-naming standards — is inlined. Anchor 3 ("content that should be separate is inline") fits: not anchor 4 because the inline detail is more than a minor organization gap, not anchor 2 because section structure and reference signaling are good rather than minimal.

Specificity

The description lists several concrete actions — "Implement a story", "ADR guidelines", "right programmer agent", "code plus test" — plus the downstream command routing (/story-done, /story-readiness, /code-review). It falls short of anchor 5 because it omits significant capabilities (context loading, phase-gated verification, session-state updates), but exceeds anchor 3 since more than 1–2 specific actions are named.

Completeness

The "what" is clear (implement a story following ADR guidelines, routing to the right programmer agent, writing code plus test), but there is no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance — the sequencing of sibling commands only weakly implies when to invoke it. Per the rubric guideline, a missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 3.

Trigger Term Quality

"Implement a story" is a natural phrase a user would say, but coverage is thin — no variations or synonyms such as "user story", "start work on", "continue the story", or "sprint task". Anchor 4 requires good keyword coverage with only a few natural terms missing; here most natural variants are absent, fitting anchor 3.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The noun "story" is shared across several sibling skills (/create-stories, /story-readiness, /story-done), and the description relies on the single verb "Implement" to differentiate itself rather than explicit positioning. Anchor 3 ("could still overlap with similar skills") fits; it is not anchor 4 because the overlap with the other story-lifecycle skills is more than minor.