Conciseness

The body is dense with non-obvious, Convex-specific constraints (auth/env unavailability in components, ID-as-string boundary rules, paginator over .paginate()) and wastes nothing on concepts Claude already knows. It sits at anchor 4 ("Efficient; minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed") rather than 5 because the app-wrapper example appears nearly verbatim twice (the skeleton's sendNotification and the Client-facing API pattern) and the Checklist restates the Critical Rules.

Actionability

Five complete, copy-paste-ready code blocks cover the full path (component config, schema, functions, app wiring, app wrapper), plus exact commands ("npx convex codegen --component-dir convex/components/<name>", "npx convex dev") and bad/good pattern contrasts. This matches anchor 5 ("Fully executable; copy-paste ready code or commands; specific examples cover the common cases") and exceeds anchor 4, which allows minor gaps.

Workflow Clarity

A clear 10-step sequence ending in explicit validation ("Run npx convex dev and fix codegen, type, or boundary issues before finishing"), a Validation section with an ordered fallback command list and an error-recovery feedback loop ("If validation blocks on Convex login or deployment setup, stop and ask the user for that exact step instead of guessing"), and a checklist. This matches anchor 5's validate-fix-retry structure; this is not a destructive/batch operation, so no cap applies.

Progressive Disclosure

The bundle matches the body: all four references/ files exist, are referenced one level deep (the reference files themselves contain no further references), and are well signaled via the goal-to-reference decision table, "Read exactly one reference file before proceeding", and a dedicated Reference Files section, with advanced patterns correctly deferred to a reference. This matches anchor 5 ("Clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references"); the only nit — advanced-patterns.md is linked from Patterns rather than listed in Reference Files — does not rise to an anchor-4 organization gap.

Specificity

"Builds reusable Convex components with isolated tables and app-facing APIs" names the domain and one concrete action with two concrete objects (isolated tables, app-facing APIs), but does not list several distinct actions. It matches anchor 3 ("Names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive") rather than anchor 4, which expects multiple specific actions like create, wire, and publish.

Completeness

The description explicitly answers both: what ("Builds reusable Convex components with isolated tables and app-facing APIs") and when ("Use for new components, reusable backend modules, integrations, or component boundary work") with concrete trigger phrases. This matches the anchor-5 example structure of a clear what followed by an explicit "Use for..." clause with concrete triggers, not anchor 4 where the when would be less specific.

Trigger Term Quality

Trigger phrases "new components, reusable backend modules, integrations, or component boundary work" are natural terms a user would say. It is good coverage but not the anchor-5 level of comprehensive synonyms and extensions — variations like "npm package", "publish", or "share across apps" are absent, placing it at anchor 4.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Convex components" is a clear, narrow niche with distinct triggers (component creation, boundary work), so the risk of firing for an unrelated skill is minimal. It matches anchor 5 ("Clear niche with distinct triggers; minimal conflict risk"); anchor 4 would require some overlap with closely related skills, which is not present.