The three-line body states only what is needed ('This skill is a compatibility alias for xlsx. Load and follow the xlsx skill body for the actual workflow.'), with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows, matching the 'lean and efficient; every token earns its place' anchor; it does not slip to score 2 because there is no unnecessary explanation to trim.

The instruction 'Load and follow the xlsx skill body for the actual workflow' is a specific, executable single action for this instruction-only alias; per the code-vs-instruction scoring note the absence of code is not penalized when guidance is this concrete, so it reaches the score-3 anchor rather than the score-2 'incomplete/pseudocode' anchor.

This is a simple single-purpose skill whose single action (load and follow xlsx) is unambiguous; the simple-skills note allows a 3 when the single action is clear, and no destructive/batch operation is present to require validation checkpoints that would cap it at 2.

The skill is under 50 lines, references no bundle files (references/scripts/assets are absent), and points one level deep to the xlsx skill; under the under-50-lines guideline well-organized minimal content scores 3, and there is no nested reference chain that would drop it to 2 or 1.

The description names a domain ('xlsx skill') and a concrete action ('Compatibility alias', 'Prefer loading xlsx') but does not enumerate the underlying capabilities; it is closer to 'names domain and some actions, not comprehensive' than to the score-3 multi-action anchor, and not so vague as to fall to score 1.

It states what the skill is ('Compatibility alias for the xlsx skill. Prefer loading xlsx.') but provides no 'Use when...' trigger guidance, so per the rubric guideline a missing explicit-when clause caps completeness at 2; it is above score 1 because the 'what' is present.

It surfaces one relevant keyword ('xlsx') but omits the natural variations a user would say ('spreadsheets', 'Excel', 'tabular data', '.xlsx'); 'Compatibility alias' is technical phrasing, matching the score-2 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' anchor rather than the full coverage of score 3.

It is clearly tied to a single target ('xlsx skill'), but as an alias it is designed to trigger on the same cues as xlsx, creating overlap with that skill; this fits 'somewhat specific but could still overlap with similar skills' better than the score-3 'distinct triggers, unlikely to conflict' anchor.