Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient procedural instruction with no concept over-explanation, but 'Critical Reminders' restates the 'Documentarian Only' rules and phase checkpoints, and injunctions like 'No suggestions' appear in several forms across ~390 lines. This matches 'mostly efficient but could be tightened' rather than 'minor instances of over-explanation'.

Actionability

Fully executable guidance throughout: concrete bash commands (metadata gathering, the PRP store resolver, gh repo view), copy-paste agent prompt templates, an exact research-file path pattern, a complete document template, and a fill-in output format. Not below 5 since the common cases are covered with copy-paste-ready material.

Workflow Clarity

Six clearly sequenced phases each end in an explicit PHASE_#_CHECKPOINT checklist, with 'Wait for ALL agents before proceeding' and a 'No placeholder values remain' validation gate. This matches the anchor for clear sequence with explicit validation steps and checklists; the operation is non-destructive so no cap applies.

Progressive Disclosure

Well-sectioned single file with clear headers and no nested references, but the resolver block annotated 'keep byte-identical across skills' and the long document/output templates are inlined rather than split into a script or reference file. Good structure with minor organization gaps fits anchor 4 better than 3, since nothing is buried and navigation is easy.

Specificity

'Research codebase questions using parallel agents' and 'documents what exists' name the domain with two concrete actions, but omit capabilities like synthesizing findings into a research document and file:line evidence. This matches 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, not comprehensive' rather than 'several specific actions'.

Completeness

Both parts are explicit: what ('Research codebase questions using parallel agents - documents what exists, not what should change') and when, with concrete trigger phrases ('when the user asks how the codebase works, where something lives, or invokes /prp-codebase-question'). The 'when' is specific with triggers, exceeding anchor 4 whose 'when' could be more explicit.

Trigger Term Quality

'how the codebase works', 'where something lives', and the slash-command name are natural phrases users would say, but common variations like 'explain', 'trace', or 'architecture' are missing. Good coverage with a few natural terms absent fits anchor 4, not 5's synonym-and-extension comprehensiveness.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The 'documents what exists, not what should change' carve-out clearly separates it from review/refactoring skills, but it could still overlap with general codebase-exploration or documentation skills. 'Mostly distinct; minor overlap risk' fits better than 5's 'minimal conflict risk'.