Conciseness

The body is lean: a one-paragraph purpose statement, a copy-paste command with two invocation alternatives, a compact input table, and a one-line output note — no explanations of concepts Claude already knows. It is not 5 because the input table and the Input JSON Schema are redundant (both say 'type: string, optional') and the opening paragraph repeats the frontmatter description almost verbatim.

Actionability

Concrete, executable bash commands are given for all three invocation styles, plus actionable troubleshooting ('npm install -g unity-mcp-cli' or 'npx unity-mcp-cli'). It falls short of 5 only because the primary example uses the placeholder '"string_value"' instead of a realistic value like "Light", which the surrounding text mentions but the runnable example does not.

Workflow Clarity

This is a simple, single-action skill (one read-only CLI invocation with an optional argument), and the single action is unambiguous: exact command, input spec, invocation alternatives, and failure recovery are all specified. The scoring note for simple skills allows a 5 here; no validation checkpoints are needed since the operation is non-destructive and non-batch.

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is under 50 lines, has no bundle files to disclose, and needs none — the content fits comfortably inline. Sections (How to Call, Troubleshooting, Input, Output) are well-organized, and the only external pointer ('Read the /unity-initial-setup skill') is clearly signaled and one level deep.

Specificity

The description lists three concrete actions — "List RQL sources and the component types present in the loaded scenes" and "pass a type name for its members" — matching the anchor for several specific actions with minor gaps (methods, asset functions, and GameObject/Transform members are only covered in the body, not the description). Not score 5 because coverage is not comprehensive, and not 3 because it goes beyond the 1–2 actions of that anchor.

Completeness

The 'what' is clearly stated (list sources, component types with their members), but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance; the 'when' is at best weakly implied by "pass a type name". Per the judging guidelines, a missing explicit trigger clause caps completeness at 3.

Trigger Term Quality

Relevant domain keywords are present ("RQL sources", "component types", "loaded scenes", "type name", "members") but common variations and synonyms a user might naturally say (e.g., "Unity components", "inspect a component", "scene schema") are missing. It sits between the 'some relevant keywords' (3) and 'good keyword coverage' (4) anchors, closer to 3 given the jargon-heavy phrasing.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The RQL/Unity component-schema niche is fairly distinct with domain-specific terms, so it is unlikely to trigger generic skills by mistake. It is not 5 because without explicit trigger phrasing it has minor overlap risk with closely related sibling skills in the same RQL tool family (e.g., a query-oriented rql skill).