Conciseness

The body is dense with QVeris-specific contract knowledge Claude cannot know (billing rules, mode gating, truncation behavior, measured provider quality variance) with almost no generic filler. A few passages run long — e.g. the quote_not_bounded rationale 'because its leading number is not the bill: 1 credits/result charged 9.66 credits for one stock-year' — keeping it at 'efficient; minor instances that could be trimmed' rather than the lean 5 anchor.

Actionability

Gives concrete tool names (qveris_search/inspect/execute), four example search queries, specific fields and defaults ('max_response_size', '20480' default, '-1'), and exact CLI commands ('vibe-trading data status'). For an instruction-only MCP-tool skill this is mostly executable guidance; it stops short of the 5 anchor because no example execute payload or call syntax is shown for the common case.

Workflow Clarity

The search -> inspect -> execute sequence is clearly numbered with a real validation checkpoint (inspect verifies required parameters, enums, and date formats before any paid call) and explicit gating ('only after the user has enabled QVeris and the tool has been inspected'). Failure behavior is documented (not_charged outcomes, truncation fallback via full_content_file_url), but there is no explicit error-recovery loop after a failed execute, so it sits at 'most checkpoints present; minor validation gaps' rather than 5.

Progressive Disclosure

The ~100-line body is an operational overview, with full API request/response schemas split into references/rest-api.md and provider coverage into references/coverage.md — both verified to exist, one level deep, and clearly signaled in a dedicated References section. This matches the top anchor: clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references and easy navigation.

Specificity

Names the domain concretely ('Paid capability marketplace for global multi-asset data') and one conditional usage action ('use it when free Vibe-Trading sources lack coverage, depth, or provider quality'), but lists no concrete operations (e.g., search, inspect, execute paid data calls). Matches the anchor 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive'; a 4 would require several specific actions.

Completeness

Explicitly answers what ('Paid capability marketplace for global multi-asset data') and when with three concrete enumerated conditions ('lack coverage, depth, or provider quality') plus an explicit default rule ('keep free sources as the default for routine OHLCV'). Matches the top anchor; a 4 would have a vaguer or less enumerated 'when' clause.

Trigger Term Quality

Contains relevant keywords ('coverage', 'depth', 'provider quality', 'OHLCV', 'multi-asset data') but misses the natural phrases a user would say when needing this skill ('options Greeks', 'analyst estimates', 'premium financial data', 'China A-share'). Fits 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms'; not 4 because the synonym coverage is thin and partly internal jargon ('Vibe-Trading sources').

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

It carves a clear niche — the paid escalation path explicitly scoped against free built-in sources — so it is unlikely to trigger for unrelated skills. Distinct trigger conditions and the OHLCV default rule give it minimal conflict risk, matching the 'clear niche with distinct triggers' anchor.