Conciseness

The body is a lean, imperative runbook with zero padding: "Do not conclude `ok` from successful `ccb` command exit codes alone" and "Old pane text is evidence of residue until the current lineage is proven" convey dense operational rules with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows. Every section earns its tokens, matching the anchor-5 lean-and-efficient profile.

Actionability

Copy-paste-ready commands cover the common cases: `ccb ping ccbd`, `ccb doctor`, `ccb ps`, `ccb queue --detail all`, `ccb pend --inbox --detail <agent>`, `ccb trace <job_id|message_id|attempt_id|reply_id>`, `ccb config validate`, `ccb reload --dry-run`, plus a concrete report template and named handoff targets (`ccb-self-recover`, `ccb-self-chain`, `ccb-config`). It is not anchor 4 because the guidance is fully executable rather than having minor gaps.

Workflow Clarity

The Core Workflow is a clear numbered sequence with explicit validation checkpoints and feedback loops: compare normalized fingerprints after an interval to classify progress versus a frozen screen, "run `ccb config validate` first, then `ccb reload --dry-run`", report a blocker when the full artifact is absent, and rate confidence. The skill is read-only triage, so the destructive/batch-operation cap does not apply.

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well-organized (Evidence Model, Core Workflow, Pane Deep Dive, Failure Domains, Reporting, Red Lines) with no nested-reference risk and no broken references, matching anchor 4. It is not 5 because the body is ~127 lines with everything inline and no one-level-deep reference files; the under-50-lines exception for a 5 on organization alone does not apply, and the pane deep-dive detail is a natural candidate for a separate reference.

Specificity

"Diagnose CCB runtime, mounted daemon graph, tmux namespace and panes, provider context, queue/inbox/trace, replies/artifacts, config drift, and storage boundaries" comprehensively enumerates concrete diagnostic targets, but a single verb ('Diagnose') carries all of them rather than listing multiple distinct actions. It sits between anchor 4 (several specific actions, minor gaps) and anchor 5 (multiple distinct concrete actions), closer to comprehensive coverage than to a gap, but the action variety of the anchor-5 example is not matched.

Completeness

The description explicitly answers both: what ("Diagnose CCB runtime, mounted daemon graph, ... storage boundaries") and when ("Use when the user asks what is broken, which agent is stuck, ..."), mirroring the anchor-5 example's what-plus-concrete-trigger-phrase structure. It is not anchor 4 because the 'when' clause is fully explicit with multiple concrete trigger scenarios rather than only partly specific.

Trigger Term Quality

"what is broken, which agent is stuck, whether CCB is mounted, why a reply did not arrive, or what to check first" are natural phrases a user would actually say. However, common synonyms and phrasings like 'debug', 'troubleshoot', 'hung', or 'not responding' are absent, so coverage is good rather than comprehensive per the anchor-5 standard.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The description carves out a clear niche (CCB runtime diagnostics) with triggers ('whether CCB is mounted', 'why a reply did not arrive') that only apply to this skill, matching the anchor-5 clear-niche pattern. Other skills are unlikely to fire on these CCB-specific triggers.