Conciseness

The procedural steps are tight and command-driven, but there is real duplication: step 9's full example summary is repeated almost verbatim in the 'Output On Success' template, and several Guardrails ('Always prompt for selection, never auto-select', 'apply specs in chronological order') restate rules already given in the steps. This matches 'mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened' rather than the efficient anchor.

Actionability

Nearly every step is executable: `openspec list --json`, `openspec status --change "<name>" --json`, checkbox-counting rules (`- [ ]` vs `- [x]`), the `### Requirement:` extraction pattern, and copy-paste bash for the archive move. The minor gap keeping it from a 5 is step 8a's 'Use the openspec-sync-specs approach (agent-driven intelligent merge)', which defers the most delicate operation to another skill's approach without inline mechanics.

Workflow Clarity

Nine explicitly sequenced steps with real validation checkpoints for a batch/destructive operation: pre-flight status gathering (step 3), a consolidated status table with warnings (step 6), a single user confirmation before execution (step 7), per-change outcome tracking (success/failed/skipped), and explicit failure recovery ('If archive target exists, fail that change but continue with others'). This matches the anchor requiring explicit validation, error recovery, and checklist-style structure.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is well-sectioned (Steps, Conflict Resolution Examples, Output templates, Guardrails) with no nested references and clear navigation, and no bundle files exist to consult. Minor gaps: the ~250-line body duplicates its output templates inline where a single template or a reference file would do, and 'the openspec-sync-specs approach' is an unsignaled external reference. This places it just below the well-split anchor at 5.

Specificity

The phrase 'Archive multiple completed changes at once' names the domain (completed changes) and one concrete action (batch archive), but stops there — no mention of spec syncing, conflict resolution, or status reporting that the skill actually performs. This matches the anchor 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive' and falls below the score-4 anchor, which lists several specific actions.

Completeness

Both 'what' ('Archive multiple completed changes at once') and 'when' ('Use when archiving several parallel changes') are present, but the 'when' clause nearly restates the 'what' without adding concrete trigger conditions — matching 'has both what and when; when could be more explicit or specific'. Not a 3 because the explicit 'Use when...' clause exists and is unambiguous.

Trigger Term Quality

'Use when archiving several parallel changes' supplies relevant keywords ('archive', 'changes', 'parallel') but misses common variations users would naturally say — 'bulk archive', 'cleanup completed changes', 'openspec'. It sits at 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms', below the good-coverage anchor.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'Changes' is generic without the openspec context — the description never names openspec — so it could overlap with skills about code changes, git changes, or changelogs. This fits 'somewhat specific but could still overlap with similar skills' rather than the mostly-distinct anchor.