Conciseness

The 370-line body is dense with genuinely non-obvious project rules (status mapping, minimal-path routing), but includes unnecessary padding: the minimal-path handling is restated across Steps 2, 4m, 5, 7, 8, and 9; and the `any_of` section recounts a past incident ('hand-evaluating it has already produced a false incomplete once') plus rationale that could be trimmed. Mostly efficient but could be tightened, matching anchor 3; it is not severely padded enough for anchor 2's 'several unnecessary explanations'.

Actionability

Guidance is fully executable: exact commands ('bash .claude/scripts/artifact-check.sh --phase [current-phase]', the Grep pattern for STATUS/CHECKPOINT markers), an explicit status-to-report mapping table, exact invocation constraints (no absolute path, no cd, no 2>&1, matching the permission grant), and copy-paste output templates for both the phase and minimal shapes. This matches anchor 5's 'copy-paste ready commands covering common cases'.

Workflow Clarity

Nine clearly sequenced steps with explicit branching (the minimal path is routed deterministically at Step 2 into Step 4m, with explicit skip rules for Steps 5 and 8), deterministic validation via artifact-check.sh instead of ad-hoc globbing, explicit status mapping, and a defined recovery path for NO_CHECK/MANUAL steps (ask the user). Anchor 5's 'clear sequence with explicit validation steps and error-recovery guidance' fits; the skill is read-only so no destructive-operation cap applies.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is well-sectioned and its external references (.claude/docs/workflow-catalog.yaml, workflow-modes.md, config-resolution.md, settings-guidance.md § 4) are clearly signaled with paths, but no bundle files exist and all 370 lines live inline in SKILL.md. Content that could sit in reference files — the two full output templates, the minimal-path rules repeated across steps, the status mapping table — is inlined, matching anchor 3 ('some structure but could be better organized; content that should be separate is inline') rather than anchor 4's 'most content appropriately placed'.

Specificity

"What should I do next?" conveys a single minimal function (answering the next-step question) but names no domain and no concrete actions like 'reads the workflow catalog', 'checks artifact completion', or 'determines current phase'. It sits between anchor 1 (no concrete actions) and anchor 3 (domain plus 1-2 concrete actions): it gestures at one action but never names the pipeline/orientation domain.

Completeness

The 'when' is explicit ("Use when stuck or you don't know what to do") and the 'what' is present in question form (answers "what should I do next?"), but the what is thin — it never says it locates the project in a development pipeline and recommends the next command. Both present with room for a more specific what, matching anchor 4 rather than the fully concrete anchor 5.

Trigger Term Quality

"Use when stuck or you don't know what to do" plus "What should I do next?" captures natural phrases users actually say. Missing common synonyms like "lost", "what's next", or "next steps", so it falls just short of the comprehensive-synonyms anchor 5.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"What should I do next? Use when stuck" is very broad — any orientation, help, or planning skill could claim it, creating high overlap risk. It is not entirely content-free (anchor 1), because it does stake out the guidance/orientation niche, but it overlaps with many similar skills rather than a clearly distinct trigger set.