Conciseness

The body is dense and assumes Claude's competence (never explains what a rebase or lockfile is), but the full Markdown templates for the Step 6 summary, per-file decision record, and HALT schema, plus advisory asides like 'These are configurable heuristics, not empirical laws', could be tightened or pushed to a reference. This matches 'efficient; minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed' rather than level 5's every-token-earns-its-place.

Actionability

Every step ships an exact executable command with flags ('timeout 30 mergiraf solve -- <file> --compact --keep-backup=false', script invocations with --json/--top/--k), exit-code semantics (124 for timeout, 5 for the reprompt artifact), and complete lockfile-to-regeneration-command and context-to-continue-command tables. Fully copy-paste ready.

Workflow Clarity

Steps 1–6 are clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints (validate-and-reprompt.sh with a bounded retry budget, semantic-audit.sh where 'Any SUSPECT output requires review'), a feedback loop ('Loop to Step 1 if more conflicts appear'), HALT handling for un-inferable intent, and abort criteria. Matches the level-5 anchor including error-recovery loops.

Progressive Disclosure

Good structure overall: the body is an actionable overview, references are one level deep and clearly signaled ('read ... only when needed', 'Full guidance: references/pr-decomposition.md'), and detailed material is split into references/ and scripts/. However, the body instructs 'Read ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/constitution.md' but no constitution.md exists in the bundle, and four of the eight reference files (history-mining.md, intent-inference.md, mergiraf-integration.md, semantic-conflicts.md) are not navigable from SKILL.md. This lands at level 4 (minor organization gaps) rather than 5 due to the broken/missing navigation targets.

Specificity

The description lists multiple concrete actions — 'Resolve git conflicts (rebase, merge, cherry-pick, revert) using mergiraf, deterministic category handling, explicit intent inference, validation, and semantic-conflict auditing' plus 'decomposes an oversized PR or branch into smaller stacked PRs' — with comprehensive coverage across both modes. It matches the level-5 anchor (multiple specific concrete actions, comprehensive), not level 4, because there are no notable gaps in capability coverage.

Completeness

Both questions are answered explicitly: what — 'Resolve git conflicts... using mergiraf, deterministic category handling, explicit intent inference, validation, and semantic-conflict auditing'; when — 'Use when git status shows unmerged paths or an operation is paused with conflicts.' This matches the level-5 anchor with a concrete when clause, not level 4 where the when is only present but less specific.

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural-term coverage: 'git conflicts', 'rebase', 'merge', 'cherry-pick', 'revert', 'unmerged paths', 'stacked PRs'. A few phrases users would naturally say are absent from the description itself, such as 'merge conflict', 'resolve conflicts', and 'conflict markers' (these appear in the when_to_use field, not the description), so it sits between the level-4 and level-5 anchors, closer to 4.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (git conflict resolution plus oversized-PR decomposition) with distinct triggers ('unmerged paths', 'stacked PRs') and minimal overlap with adjacent skills; it explicitly bounds itself away from general PR review. Matches the level-5 anchor rather than 4 because the trigger surface is narrowly scoped.