Conciseness

The body is pure project-specific rules in terse bullets with zero padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows — every line encodes a repo-specific constraint (e.g. "Never throw in destructors; use SQLITECPP_ASSERT() instead", "max 120 chars"). This matches anchor 5: lean and efficient, every token earns its place.

Actionability

Every rule is concrete and executable: named API functions ("tryExec(), tryExecuteStep(), tryReset()"), named macros ("SQLITECPP_ASSERT()", "SQLITECPP_API"), an executable command ("git add --renormalize ."), and concrete identifier examples for each naming prefix ("mDatabase", "bExists", "pValue"). Per the code-vs-instruction note, the absence of code blocks is not penalized because the guidance is fully actionable — matching anchor 5.

Workflow Clarity

This is a single-purpose standards reference under 50 lines, clearly organized into four unambiguous sections (Non-negotiables, Error handling, Documentation and style, Naming conventions); the simple-skill exception applies and each rule is directly applicable without sequence ambiguity. It is above anchor 4 because there are no gaps or implicit checkpoints to point to, and the skill involves no destructive or batch operations that would require validation loops.

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is under 50 lines with no need for external references, and all content fits appropriately in SKILL.md with well-organized section headers — the rubric guideline explicitly scores this structure 5. No bundle files exist (no references/, scripts/, or assets/), so there is no nesting or buried-reference problem.

Specificity

The description enumerates several concrete coverage areas — "core edits, public headers, style, and Doxygen" — matching the anchor for several specific items with minor gaps (error handling and naming conventions from the body are not mentioned). It is above anchor 3 because more than 1-2 areas are named, and below anchor 5 because coverage of the skill's full scope is incomplete.

Completeness

The description gives a clear "what" ("coding standards and API rules for core edits, public headers, style, and Doxygen") but contains no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines. This exactly matches anchor 3: clear what, missing when.

Trigger Term Quality

It includes natural domain keywords a user would say — "SQLiteCpp", "coding standards", "public headers", "Doxygen" — giving good keyword coverage. It falls short of anchor 5 because common variations like "C++", "conventions", "formatting", or "lint" are missing, but exceeds anchor 3 since the terms present are natural and relevant rather than partial.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Naming the specific library "SQLiteCpp" establishes a clear niche with distinct triggers and minimal conflict risk — it would not plausibly trigger for any non-SQLiteCpp skill. This matches anchor 5.