Lean and well-sectioned with no padding explaining concepts Claude already knows; every section (Process, Evidence and Judgment Rules, Output) earns its place.

Concrete six-step process with sub-bullets, explicit deliverable list, and specific rules like 'Separate decided, assigned, and discussed'; absence of code is appropriate for this instruction-only skill.

Clear numbered sequence with the 'Evidence and Judgment Rules' section functioning as validation checkpoints (e.g., 'Do not inflate tentative discussion into final decisions'); the task is non-destructive so the feedback-loop cap does not apply.

Single self-contained file with well-organized sections and no nested or external references; no bundle files exist, so the well-organized overview qualifies for full marks.

Lists multiple concrete actions ('decisions, action items, unresolved questions, risks, and follow-up artifacts'), which would be a 3, but the second-person phrasing 'Best when you have notes' triggers the rubric's -1 specificity penalty.

Explicitly answers both what it does and when to use it via an explicit 'Use for prompts like…' trigger clause, matching the 'clearly answers both what AND when' anchor.

Quotes natural phrases a user would actually say ('summarize this meeting', 'extract action items', 'what did we decide', 'draft the follow-up'), giving strong coverage of common variations.

Carves a clear meeting-specific niche with distinct triggers ('what did we decide', 'draft the follow-up') unlikely to fire for non-meeting synthesis skills.