Conciseness

The body is mostly lean imperative guidance with concrete commands and an example tree; the main trimmable redundancy is that ARCHITECTURE.md and the test/typecheck/lint commands each appear in two sections. This fits 'Efficient; minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed' rather than a 3 because it does not explain concepts Claude already knows.

Actionability

It gives concrete, executable guidance: exact commands (`bun run test:run`, `bun run typecheck`, `bun run lint:fix`), the `#src/*` import alias, `*.test.ts` co-location, `loadFixture()` from `fixtures/`, and a directory-tree example. It is not a 5 because there is no complete executable code example, only commands and conventions, leaving minor gaps for a code-producing skill.

Workflow Clarity

The process is clearly sequenced (Your Task 1-9, Autonomous Workflow loop, Stopping Conditions) with explicit validation checkpoints (run tests, typecheck, lint) and a feedback loop (Test -> Fix -> re-run, and stop only when all pass). This matches 'Clear sequence with explicit validation steps; feedback loops for error recovery; checklists'.

Progressive Disclosure

With no bundle files present, the single SKILL.md is well-organized into clear sections (Your Task, Implementation Guidelines, Architecture Patterns, Autonomous Workflow, Stopping Conditions, Commands, Begin) and has no nested references. It is not a 5 because the Architecture Patterns detail and duplicated command listings could be tightened, leaving minor organization gaps.

Specificity

The phrase "Implement a spec from the plans directory" names the domain (spec implementation) and a single action (implement) but offers no second concrete action, matching the anchor 'Names the domain but actions are minimal or generic'. It is not a 3 because no further specific actions are listed.

Completeness

There is a clear "what" (implement a spec) but no "when" / "Use when..." clause, matching the anchor 'Has a clear what but when is missing or only weakly implied'; the missing trigger guidance caps completeness at 3. It is not a 4 because no explicit usage trigger is present.

Trigger Term Quality

Only "spec" functions as a natural user keyword; "plans directory" is project-specific jargon rather than a phrase users would naturally say, fitting 'one or two generic keywords; missing the natural phrases'. It is not a 3 because common synonyms or variations (e.g. specification, plan, feature) are absent.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Tying the trigger to a specific "plans directory" gives it a niche, but the generic verb "Implement" means it could still overlap with other build/implement skills, matching 'Somewhat specific but could still overlap with similar skills'. It is not a 4 because the description is too terse to clearly distinguish it from related implementation skills.