Conciseness

The body gives commands and paths directly ("openspec list --json", "mkdir -p openspec/changes/archive") with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows; the only trimmable material is the Guardrails section restating rules already in the steps ("Always prompt for change selection if not provided"), which is minor duplication fitting the efficient-with-minor-trims anchor at 4 rather than the noticeable-verbosity anchor at 3.

Actionability

Concrete executable commands with literal paths ("openspec status --change \"<name>\" --json", "mv openspec/changes/<name> openspec/changes/archive/YYYY-MM-DD-<name>"), explicit task-marking syntax ("- [ ]" vs "- [x]"), and a copy-paste output template cover the common cases; a few directives stay high-level ("Compare each delta spec with its corresponding main spec" gives no comparison method), keeping it below fully-executable at 5.

Workflow Clarity

Six clearly numbered steps with explicit confirmation checkpoints (AskUserQuestion for selection, for incomplete artifacts, for incomplete tasks, and a three-option sync prompt) plus a target-exists failure check give this destructive move operation most of its checkpoints; it falls short of 5 because there is no post-move verification that the archive succeeded and no error-recovery loop for the mv step.

Progressive Disclosure

The file is cleanly sectioned (Input / Steps / Output On Success / Guardrails) and correctly delegates sync detail to the openspec-sync-specs skill, a clearly signaled one-level reference; no bundle files exist and nothing clearly needs splitting, but at ~105 lines with some step-level detail that could live elsewhere it fits 'good structure; minor organization gaps' at 4 rather than the well-split anchor at 5.

Specificity

"Archive a completed change" names the domain plus one concrete action, but the description never mentions the completion checks, task verification, or spec syncing the skill actually performs, matching the '1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive' anchor rather than the several-action anchor at 4.

Completeness

Both parts are explicitly present: the what ("Archive a completed change in the experimental workflow") and a clear when-clause ("Use when the user wants to finalize and archive a change after implementation is complete"), so it sits above the missing-when anchor at 3 but below 5 because the what is thin and the when largely restates it rather than adding distinct trigger phrases.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural user phrases like "archive", "finalize", "change", and "after implementation is complete" are present and would be said verbatim by a user; a few common variations (e.g. "close out" or "wrap up the change") are missing, fitting the 'good keyword coverage; a few natural terms missing' anchor rather than 3 where relevant keywords are only partially covered.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Scoped to "the experimental workflow" with archive-specific triggers, it is mostly distinct from generic skills; shared vocabulary with sibling openspec skills (e.g. sync or list) creates minor overlap risk, matching 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk' rather than the clear-niche anchor at 5.