Conciseness

Line-by-line the body is tight (commands with one-line comments, terse code examples), but roughly half of it — "Common Lint Fixes", "Language Requirements", "When to Comment", and the two "Development Principles" sections — is duplicated nearly verbatim in references/rules/code-quality.md, and the "Pre-Commit Workflow" section repeats a command already shown in "Lint Commands". This matches anchor 3's 'mostly efficient but could be tightened' rather than anchor 2, since there is little conceptual over-explanation, only redundant material.

Actionability

The body gives copy-paste-ready commands ("yarn agent:check --profile commit", "npx oxlint --tsconfig ./tsconfig.json --type-aware ... --deny-warnings") and executable before/after examples covering the common cases (unused vars/params, floating promises, English comments, gas-limit and fee comments, spellcheck skip-list grep/echo). This matches anchor 5's 'fully executable; copy-paste ready; specific examples cover the common cases'.

Workflow Clarity

The usage guidance is unambiguous — "always use yarn agent:check first; use lower-level commands only when debugging" — with a pre-commit checklist ("yarn agent:check --profile commit passes") serving as a validation gate, matching anchor 4. It falls short of anchor 5 because the body has no error-recovery loop of its own: when agent:check fails, the fix-and-reverify workflow lives only in the referenced fix-lint.md, and the body never explicitly says 'if it fails, follow references/rules/fix-lint.md then re-run'.

Progressive Disclosure

The bundle structure is good: two real, one-level-deep reference files (references/rules/code-quality.md, references/rules/fix-lint.md), both clearly signaled in a "Detailed Guides" section with bullet summaries of their contents, matching anchor 4. It does not reach anchor 5 because the body inlines ~100 lines that duplicate code-quality.md instead of being a lean overview that defers detail to the reference — the duplication noted under conciseness is an organization gap beyond 'minor'.

Specificity

The description lists several concrete areas with named tools — "lint (oxlint), format (oxfmt), type check (tsc), pre-commit hooks, and comment conventions" — going beyond anchor 3's 1-2 actions, but it names domains of standards rather than executable actions and omits coverage areas present in the body (naming conventions, spellcheck handling), so it falls short of anchor 5's comprehensive coverage.

Completeness

The "what" is clear (lint/format/type-check standards with tool names), but there is no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance anywhere in the description, which per the judging guidelines caps completeness at 3. It is a solid match for anchor 3 ('clear what, when missing') rather than anchor 4, which requires both.

Trigger Term Quality

"lint", "format", "type check", "pre-commit", and "comment" are natural phrases users would say when needing this skill, matching anchor 4's good coverage. It misses common variations users might actually say — "lint warnings", "fix lint errors", "spellcheck", "ESLint" — keeping it below anchor 5.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The specific tool names ("oxlint", "oxfmt", "tsc") carve out a mostly distinct niche from sibling skills like 1k-sentry or 1k-test-version, fitting anchor 4's "mostly distinct". It retains minor overlap risk with "1k-coding-patterns - General coding patterns", whose general quality/pre-commit guidance could trigger for either skill, so it is not anchor 5.