Conciseness

Mostly efficient with no concept-padding, but includes restating lines ('This shows which H.264 encoders are available') and slightly padded 'Common Pitfalls' / 'When to Use Stream Copy' prose that could be tightened, matching anchor 3 rather than 4.

Actionability

Provides copy-paste ready, fully executable commands (probe command, test encode command) and a complete bash decision-flow script with working logic that covers the common encoder-selection cases, matching anchor 5.

Workflow Clarity

A clear three-step sequence (Probe, Choose, Verify) with an explicit validation checkpoint (short test encode before full runs), but no explicit error-recovery feedback loop, so it sits at anchor 4 rather than 5.

Progressive Disclosure

Single self-contained file with well-organized sections and no nested references, appropriate for this size; not 5 because the 'When to Use Stream Copy' and 'Common Pitfalls' sections overlap with the Step 2 priority list, a minor organization gap.

Specificity

Names the domain (FFmpeg encoders) and one concrete action ('Check available FFmpeg encoders') tied to a purpose, but does not list several specific actions, so it matches anchor 3 rather than 4.

Completeness

The 'what' is clear (check available encoders before writing scripts), but 'when' is only weakly implied with no explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, which caps completeness at 3 per the guidelines.

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural terms like 'FFmpeg encoders' and 'encoding scripts' a user might say, but misses common synonyms and variations such as 'codec', 'transcode', 'video encoding', or 'H.264'.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Targets a clear, narrow niche (FFmpeg encoder probing) with minimal conflict risk; not a 5 only because it lacks an explicit trigger phrase that would make it unambiguously distinct.