Conciseness

The body is dense and domain-specific throughout — e.g. "`Plan.steps` is `1..n`", "Only one DevKit per model may carry a genplan", cardinality rules — with no padding explaining concepts Claude already knows. It falls just short of the 5 anchor because the "When to use a generation plan" section and the "Start here" line in the Reference Index partially duplicate information already given (the frontmatter description and the index bullets), and could be trimmed.

Actionability

Guidance is concrete and executable: "Pass `moduleName: \"<hosting module>\"` and `modelName: \"<name>@genplan\"` to `mps_mcp_create_model`", exact file pattern "`<name>@genplan.mps`", and named tools like `mps_mcp_check_root_node_problems`. Not a 5 because the concrete JSON blueprints the index promises ("Includes the verified 'the plan' and 'WithCompiledGenerator' JSON examples") are deferred to reference files rather than shown, leaving a gap in copy-paste readiness.

Workflow Clarity

The 8-step "Common-Path Workflow" is clearly sequenced and ends with an explicit validation step ("Verify with MPS UI **Show generation plan** and `mps_mcp_check_root_node_problems`"). It matches the 4 anchor rather than 5 because there is no error-recovery feedback loop (what to do when the root-node check reports problems) and the "authoring checklist" for a final scan is deferred to a reference rather than stated inline.

Progressive Disclosure

Structurally this is near-ideal: a lean overview, a well-signaled one-level-deep Reference Index with per-entry "open when…" triggers and a "Start here — most common case" routing line. However, none of the ten referenced files (references/plan-setup.md, step-catalog.md, checkpoints.md, composition-and-fork.md, fork-selectors.md, model-attributes.md, concept-quick-reference.md, verification-and-discovery.md, authoring-checklist.md, aspect-model-stereotypes.md) exist in the bundle — no references/ directory is present — so every navigation link is dead and the disclosure structure cannot actually deliver, matching the 3 anchor (structure present, references present but non-resolving) rather than 4–5.

Specificity

It lists multiple concrete capabilities: "explicit ordering of generators", "checkpoints for cross-model reference resolution", "forks for parallel branches", "IncludePlan composition", "conditional PlanContribution activation", "ParameterEquals/ConceptListSelector fork selectors", and "InitModelAttributes for targetFacet routing" — comprehensive, specific coverage matching the 5 anchor, and clearly not the 4 anchor since no notable capability area is missing.

Completeness

Both halves are explicit: the "what" ("defining or modifying an MPS generation plan — explicit ordering of generators, checkpoints…, forks…, IncludePlan composition…") and the "when" ("Use when defining or modifying…" plus a second explicit trigger clause "Apply when working with @genplan models… or debugging cross-model mapping label resolution"). This matches the 5 anchor's pattern of concrete what-and-when trigger phrasing.

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural-term coverage for the domain: "MPS generation plan", "@genplan models", "jetbrains.mps.lang.generator.plan", "DevKits", "Custom generation facet", "cross-model mapping label resolution" — the phrases an MPS user would actually say. Not 5 because a few natural variations are absent (e.g. the `.mps` file extension / "genplan.mps" pattern, "generator plan" phrasing), and not 3 because it clearly goes beyond "some relevant keywords" to near-comprehensive domain vocabulary.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

It carves out a clear niche with distinct triggers — the genplan stereotype, the specific language id, DevKit vs. Custom generation facet attachment, checkpoint/fork selector vocabulary — that no adjacent skill (generator rules, textgen, accessories) would claim, matching the 5 anchor's "clear niche with distinct triggers; minimal conflict risk".