Conciseness

The body is lean with zero padding: install commands, one bootstrap code block, one span example, and short Maple-specific notes. Every comment encodes a non-obvious gotcha Claude would not know ('every custom ActivitySource name, or its spans are dropped', 'WithLogging needs OpenTelemetry.Extensions.Hosting 1.9 or later', 'an Endpoint set in code is used as-is, so include the /v1/<signal> path'), so every token earns its place rather than explaining concepts Claude already knows.

Actionability

Guidance is fully executable: four copy-paste `dotnet add package` commands, a complete `AddOpenTelemetry()` bootstrap with resource attributes, tracing/metrics/logging export, and a working ActivitySource business-span pattern with error recording. All common cases (custom spans, log correlation, coexistence with existing exporters) are covered with concrete code.

Workflow Clarity

The sequence Install → Bootstrap → Bounded business spans → Logs → Coexistence is unambiguous and correctly ordered (dependencies before wiring, wiring before extension). This is a configuration skill with no destructive or batch operations, so no validation checkpoints are required; the included failure-mode notes (unregistered sources yield null spans, null-safe `activity?.`) serve as implicit error guidance.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is well-sectioned with clear headers and no buried or nested references (there are no bundle files, so nothing is misfiled or nested). It sits at 4 rather than 5 because the skill is over 50 lines with no external split — the coexistence notes and the business-span example are self-contained appropriately, but a leaner core with the extended example moved to a reference file would match the 'content appropriately split' anchor more closely.

Specificity

Quotes like 'OpenTelemetry.Extensions.Hosting + OTLP HTTP exporter', 'ActivitySource for spans', 'ILogger bridging via WithLogging, inline endpoint + ingest key' name several concrete, specific components rather than vague actions. Not a 5 because it reads as a noun-phrase component list rather than concrete actions (no verbs like 'configure', 'export'), leaving minor gaps in what the skill actually does; not a 3 because coverage of the stack (hosting, exporter, spans, logs, auth) is comprehensive for the domain.

Completeness

The 'what' is clear (specific packages, exporter, span/log wiring for Maple), but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance anywhere in the description. The rubric explicitly caps completeness at 3 for a missing 'when', so it cannot score 4 despite the strong 'what'.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural terms a user would say are present: '.NET / C#', 'OpenTelemetry', 'ILogger', 'ingest key'. Below 5 because common user phrasings like 'tracing', 'logs', 'metrics', 'telemetry setup', or 'instrument' are absent and 'OTLP' / 'ActivitySource' are jargon; above 3 because the core terms a user needs this skill would plausibly say are all covered.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The scope is a clear niche — 'OpenTelemetry style for Maple' with Maple-specific details (OTLP HTTP exporter, ingest key, /v1/<signal> paths) — so it is clearly distinguishable from generic .NET or OpenTelemetry skills and unlikely to trigger for the wrong skill. Minor overlap risk exists only with another Maple telemetry skill, which the scoping already minimizes.