Conciseness

The ~60-line body is dense imperative instruction with no concept explanations: path conventions are defined once ("All paths below: `<skill>` = ... `<run>` = `.design-md/`"), phase steps are single-line directives, and failures are compressed into a table. Every token earns its place.

Actionability

Gives copy-paste commands (`node <skill>/scripts/validate.mjs <run>/candidates/<id> --pages <page,list>`, `node -e "console.log(crypto.randomUUID())"`, the server launch) and exact JSON shapes for run.json/manifest.json. Falls short of fully executable because Phases 1, 3, and 6 delegate their instruction content to `<skill>/reference/interview.md`, `candidate-spec.md`, and `distill.md`, none of which exist in the bundle.

Workflow Clarity

Clear phase sequence with explicit validation and feedback loops for a batch/destructive workflow: Phase 4 validates each candidate, retries failures once with validator errors fed back, enforces a >=3-valid threshold, and deletes invalid leftovers; Phase 6 finalize is transactional (tmp file → pinned lint → backup → rename → archive); Phase 0 gates resume/replacement; and the error-handling table covers server, lint, tab-close, and interruption failures with fallbacks.

Progressive Disclosure

The on-paper design is good — each phase points to a one-level-deep reference at the point of need — but scored against the actual bundle, all four referenced paths (`reference/interview.md`, `reference/directions.md`, `reference/candidate-spec.md`, `reference/distill.md`) are missing while only `scripts/` and `assets/picker/` exist. Dangling references for the majority of phase detail is a major organization gap, not the minor one anchor 4 allows, though structure and signaling are far above anchor 2's buried/inlined-content pattern.

Specificity

Names three parameterized concrete actions — "Generate 4-6 complete candidate design systems", "let the user pick one visually in the browser", "freeze the winner into a Google-spec design.md at the project root" — covering the core pipeline. Secondary capabilities (interview/brief, validation, linting) are omitted, so coverage has minor gaps rather than being comprehensive.

Completeness

Explicitly answers both questions: what ("Generate 4-6 complete candidate design systems ... freeze the winner into a Google-spec design.md") and when ("Use ONLY when the user explicitly invokes /design-md or explicitly asks to run the design-system picker"), with concrete trigger phrases plus explicit anti-trigger guidance. Matches the anchor-5 example structure.

Trigger Term Quality

Includes the natural invocation terms for its niche — "explicitly invokes /design-md", "design-system picker", "design.md" — so good keyword coverage with only a few natural variants missing (e.g., "visual style", "pick a design direction"). Not 5 because synonym coverage is narrow; not 3 because the phrases a user would actually say to trigger it are present.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The explicit-invocation gate ("Use ONLY when the user explicitly invokes /design-md") and the distinct deliverable (a project-root design.md) give it a clear niche with minimal false-trigger risk; it may under-trigger, but it will not fire for the wrong skill.