Conciseness

Mostly operational with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows, but the "Rules" section substantially duplicates instructions restated in Steps 2, 4, and 5 (fetch origin/x, cleanup candidates, confirmation before deletion), and "How To Interpret The Result" contains dense multi-clause sentences that could be tightened. Not 4 because the duplication is more than minor trimming; not 2 because there is no generic padding or tutoring.

Actionability

Every step gives copy-paste-ready commands with all selection variants ("check 1", "check 1,3", "check A"), exact removal commands ("rtk git worktree remove <path>", "rtk proxy rm -rf <path>"), and the exact user-facing reply phrases to append. The referenced script exists with matching list/check/cleanup-candidates subcommands. Matches the fully-executable anchor.

Workflow Clarity

A clear 5-step sequence with explicit validation checkpoints and feedback loops appropriate to a destructive batch operation: always fetch before checking, dirty state reported separately, explicit user confirmation gate before any deletion ("Never auto-delete anything before the user explicitly confirms"), NEEDS_MANUAL_REVIEW fallback instead of guessing, and sandbox-blocked → request approval → rerun recovery. The destructive-operation cap does not apply because verification is thorough.

Progressive Disclosure

Good structure: the SKILL.md workflow points to a single real one-level-deep bundle script (scripts/1k-worktree-clean.sh, verified to exist with the referenced subcommands), and sections are clearly headed. Not 5 because the skill is ~130 lines with the entire result-code interpretation ("How To Interpret The Result") and output contract inlined — material that could live in a reference file at this length; not 3 because references are real, clearly signaled, and nothing is buried.

Specificity

Lists several concrete actions — "audit local git worktrees against origin/x", "choose by number or A", "decide whether stale worktree directories, already-merged worktrees, or no-delta worktrees can be cleaned up" — with only minor gaps (PR-status surfacing and the merged-check method are not mentioned, and "choose by number or A" is interaction detail rather than a capability). Not 5 because coverage is not fully comprehensive; not 3 because it goes well beyond naming 1-2 actions.

Completeness

Explicitly answers both: what it does ("audit local git worktrees against origin/x ... decide whether ... can be cleaned up") and when to use it ("Use when the user wants to" plus concrete "Triggers on" phrases). Matches the 5 anchor: both what and when with concrete trigger phrases; third-person voice is used throughout.

Trigger Term Quality

Explicit triggers "worktree clean", "worktree 合并到 x", "检测哪些 worktree 已进 x" are natural phrases a user would say, in both English and Chinese. Not 5 because common variations like "worktree cleanup", "remove/delete worktree", or "清理 worktree" are missing; not 3 because coverage is clearly better than a single generic keyword.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche — auditing local worktrees against a specific remote branch origin/x for cleanup decisions — with distinct trigger phrases, so overlap with adjacent git skills (e.g. worktree creation or general branch management) is minimal. Not 4 because no closely related skill would plausibly capture these specific triggers.