Conciseness

The body is entirely directive — "Inspect the affected source, applicable repository instructions, current diff, and relevant checks" — with zero concept explanations, zero padding, and no boilerplate; every sentence instructs. This matches "Lean and efficient; assumes Claude's competence; every token earns its place".

Actionability

Concrete deliverables exist ("Report Changed, Checked, Not checked, Next decision, Recovery") and boundaries are explicit ("Confirm only missing acceptance criteria, constraints, and scope"), but operational terms are undefined: what "checks appropriate to the change" means, what a "real recovery checkpoint" is, or how to "use an existing user journey". This fits "Some concrete guidance but incomplete; missing key details" for an instruction-only skill.

Workflow Clarity

The prose implies a coherent sequence (inspect → baseline → preserve work → implement → regression checks → rerun checks → verify → report) with named checkpoints, but the pivotal verification step ("Use ../vibe-verify/SKILL.md for the changed journey") points to a file that does not exist in the bundle, and there is no failure-recovery loop (what to do when checks fail). These validation gaps exceed the "minor" standard of anchor 4.

Progressive Disclosure

Content placement is appropriate for a 13-line skill with nothing wrongly inlined, but the body has no section headers (three unheaded paragraphs) and its single reference, ../vibe-verify/SKILL.md, is clearly signaled yet dangling — the file is absent from the bundle and its parent directory. This fits "could be better organized" with an unusable reference, below anchor 4's "minor organization gaps".

Specificity

"Add one bounded feature to an existing app" names the domain and one concrete action plus a preservation constraint, but there is no enumeration of several specific actions — the closest anchor is "Names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive". It is above anchor 2 because the action is domain-relevant rather than generic, and below anchor 4 because coverage is a single action, not several.

Completeness

The "what" is clear (add one bounded feature while preserving current behavior), but the "when" is entirely missing — "Do not restart the full new-project workflow" only weakly implies the context by contrast. Per the judging guideline, a missing "Use when..." clause caps completeness at 3.

Trigger Term Quality

Terms like "add", "feature", and "existing app" are relevant keywords a user might echo, matching "Some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms". It falls short of anchor 4 because there is no trigger guidance at all and common natural phrases ("modify", "small change", "extend the app") are absent, while "bounded" is authoring jargon users would not naturally say.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The explicit contrast "Do not restart the full new-project workflow" carves out a niche distinct from scaffolding/new-project skills, and "one bounded feature" narrows scope — fitting "Mostly distinct; minor overlap risk". It is below anchor 5 because "add a feature to an app" still broadly overlaps generic implementation requests with no trigger phrases to disambiguate.