The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence: it gives targeted guidance ('identify the 3-5 most critical unknowns', 'Ask 2-4 questions at a time') without explaining basic concepts or padding, so every section earns its place.

For an instruction-only skill it gives concrete, specific guidance — named tools (AskUserQuestion, Web Search), concrete numbers (3-5 unknowns, 2-4 questions), and explicit behaviors ('offer multiple valid approaches with their pros/cons as options'); absence of code is appropriate and not penalized.

The 'Your Task' section sequences five clear steps and the Interview Flow section adds an explicit feedback loop (incorporate answers, identify follow-ups, continue until addressed, signal completion); since this is non-destructive, the missing-validation cap does not apply.

There are no bundle files, and per the simple-skills note a single-purpose skill with well-organized sections (Task, Interview Guidelines subsections, Output) can score 3; the sections are clearly headed and easy to navigate.

The phrase 'Deep-dive interview to flesh out a spec or design document' names the domain (spec/design documents) and a main action (interviewing to flesh out), but it lists only one action rather than multiple specific concrete actions, so it falls short of a 3.

It states what the skill does (interview to flesh out a spec/design document) but provides no explicit 'Use when...' trigger for when Claude should invoke it; per the guidelines a missing trigger clause caps completeness at 2.

It includes some relevant natural terms ('spec', 'design document', 'interview', 'flesh out') but misses common variations a user might actually say (e.g. 'review my spec', 'help me design'), so coverage is partial rather than comprehensive.

The spec/design-document niche is fairly specific, but the generic word 'interview' could overlap with other conversational or research skills, so it is not clearly distinguishable enough for a 3.